Thanks for sharing! I think the big difference between getting gear you need and GAS is not getting the latest and greatest. You identified your needs and made an affordable upgrade instead of buying the latest and greatest.
Very good review. I want to buy a second body. My main is a Sony a6400. Do you recommend nikon d700, xt1 or xt2. I shoot family, portrait and landscape.
It really depends what you're looking for! I have all 3, and all 3 are very good in their own rights. if you already have an A6400, that means you already have an APS-C, compact mirrorless body. So although the X-T1 and X-T2 are pretty damn good cameras, they are rather similar to what you already have. And on top of that, you won't be able to share the lenses between your two systems. So it's nice on a user experience point of view, but not especially nice otherwise. When you'll need a small, out of the way camera chances are you'll just pick the 6400 as it's smaller, lighter and has better autofocus (image quality is identical to the X-T2, they use a very similar sensor). The D700 is on the other hand, something completely different. It's a big, loud DSLR and you will probably use that camera for things completely different than your A6400. Now, as much as I love the D700 for its color output, I can see how a 12MP camera can be limiting, especially for landscape photography. If you have the ability to get a Nikon D800 though, you could get a pretty high resolution full frame body that would kill it for landscape and portraits. If you can find one at a decent price that is.
Difficult to say. Fujifilm is using the SOS ISO standard while Nikon is using REI, so it's pretty hard to do an apple to apple comparison. I would say though, that they are all pretty equivalent, the D700 can be a little cleaner, but the X-T2 hides noise a lot better having more resolution. I'd say that it's a draw if you're just comparing ISO performance
thank you for your review. it further solidified my decision to buy the xt2. I found the xt2 somewhere but it’s body only. Which lens would you recommend for someone who is just starting out and has no lens collection yet?
there is loads of options ! you could try to find a 18-55mm f/2.8-4 lens, this is a solid choice for the X-T2, with super goo image quality and generally loer in price (since everybody get it with the camera then sell it for 250/300 bucks) if you want a constant aperture you can look at the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 which has the benefit of a constant aperture throughout the zoom range and weather sealing, but you loose the optican stabilization and it's a little pricer, coming in around 450 bucks used generally If you're mostly a prime shooter, you can look into the little f/2 primes like the 35mm, 23mm and 50mm all of those are really sharp with fast autofocus, weather sealing and compact size which fits the X-T2 well. There is also a XC version of the 35mm that ditches the metal build and the aperture ring but comes at hlaf the price for the same optics, so it's for you to decide if the price is good. Hope that helps !
... There's one thing you haven't addressed regarding the xt1 and that's the image quality out of that sensor. (I have both the xt1 and xt2) and they're a little long in the tooth, however! ,.... I to am looking at upgrading one of them.... And it's NOT the xt1.... The sensor on that camera has something special (despite the ergonomics and lack lustre performance to present day cameras)... On my travels, I ve carried both, one as back up and one as a main as well as both to save lens changes..... When looking back on my images, the xt1 showed a special ("organic", less clinical look/rendition ) that I found more appealing..... And to this day, I still keep it... As a camera, it ain't perfect but the image quality is....
I would tend to agree. The X-Trans II sensor in the X-T1 is truly phenomenal. As a matter of fact, I still keep my X-T1 too! But I would add something about the X-Trans III in the X-T2 : It's by far the best balanced sensor Fujifilm has ever put out on the market in my opinion. The X-Trans I and II were incredible as far as colors go, but they lacked the high ISO performance, the wider dynamic range of the later ones. The X-Trans IV and V are a little too "strerile" for me. The X-Trans III is for me right in the middle. It still has (imho) that organic look (not as much as teh previous ones, but much more than the later ones), but you also have more resolution, more dynamic range, less noise, better autofocus etc. The images out of my X-T2 are absolutely what I'm looking for when I picture a Fujifilm camera in my head. Tones are good, skin tones render nicely, I love the greens and the blues out of that sensor but it didn't loose the nice golden tones from the X-Trans II (thing that is completely absent of the X-Trans IV in my opinion) So just like you I keep both, they both have something to add to my photography (even if the X-T1 is sometimes a little "soo special" for what I want to achieve)
Thanks for sharing! I think the big difference between getting gear you need and GAS is not getting the latest and greatest. You identified your needs and made an affordable upgrade instead of buying the latest and greatest.
Appreciate your honesty about the Fuji’s ergonomics.
I just got the XT2 and a 27mm pancake, thank you for the video (:
Thanks for the video!! I will definitely buy it.
Very good review. I want to buy a second body. My main is a Sony a6400.
Do you recommend nikon d700, xt1 or xt2.
I shoot family, portrait and landscape.
It really depends what you're looking for!
I have all 3, and all 3 are very good in their own rights.
if you already have an A6400, that means you already have an APS-C, compact mirrorless body. So although the X-T1 and X-T2 are pretty damn good cameras, they are rather similar to what you already have. And on top of that, you won't be able to share the lenses between your two systems. So it's nice on a user experience point of view, but not especially nice otherwise. When you'll need a small, out of the way camera chances are you'll just pick the 6400 as it's smaller, lighter and has better autofocus (image quality is identical to the X-T2, they use a very similar sensor).
The D700 is on the other hand, something completely different. It's a big, loud DSLR and you will probably use that camera for things completely different than your A6400. Now, as much as I love the D700 for its color output, I can see how a 12MP camera can be limiting, especially for landscape photography. If you have the ability to get a Nikon D800 though, you could get a pretty high resolution full frame body that would kill it for landscape and portraits. If you can find one at a decent price that is.
@@uncertainrelease can you please tell me on image guality and high iso which is better?
Difficult to say. Fujifilm is using the SOS ISO standard while Nikon is using REI, so it's pretty hard to do an apple to apple comparison.
I would say though, that they are all pretty equivalent, the D700 can be a little cleaner, but the X-T2 hides noise a lot better having more resolution. I'd say that it's a draw if you're just comparing ISO performance
I am probably really late to this conversation lol I have a sony body as well and went with the fujifilm x-t2. Been loving it over the sony.
Unless you can get the dslr dirt cheap, forget it.
thank you for your review. it further solidified my decision to buy the xt2. I found the xt2 somewhere but it’s body only. Which lens would you recommend for someone who is just starting out and has no lens collection yet?
there is loads of options !
you could try to find a 18-55mm f/2.8-4 lens, this is a solid choice for the X-T2, with super goo image quality and generally loer in price (since everybody get it with the camera then sell it for 250/300 bucks)
if you want a constant aperture you can look at the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 which has the benefit of a constant aperture throughout the zoom range and weather sealing, but you loose the optican stabilization and it's a little pricer, coming in around 450 bucks used generally
If you're mostly a prime shooter, you can look into the little f/2 primes like the 35mm, 23mm and 50mm all of those are really sharp with fast autofocus, weather sealing and compact size which fits the X-T2 well. There is also a XC version of the 35mm that ditches the metal build and the aperture ring but comes at hlaf the price for the same optics, so it's for you to decide if the price is good.
Hope that helps !
Are you filming yourself in 85mm? I’d recommend you come out to like at least 50mm. If this is 50mm, come out to 56mm.
IIRC, this video was filmed on a 23mm lens
@@uncertainrelease 23?? aps-c? Looks very tight and the top of your head is being cut off. You had it zoomed in or something?
@@tomd4748 yes it was filmed with a 23mm f/2 on the Fuji X-H1.
... There's one thing you haven't addressed regarding the xt1 and that's the image quality out of that sensor. (I have both the xt1 and xt2) and they're a little long in the tooth, however! ,.... I to am looking at upgrading one of them.... And it's NOT the xt1.... The sensor on that camera has something special (despite the ergonomics and lack lustre performance to present day cameras)... On my travels, I ve carried both, one as back up and one as a main as well as both to save lens changes..... When looking back on my images, the xt1 showed a special ("organic", less clinical look/rendition ) that I found more appealing..... And to this day, I still keep it... As a camera, it ain't perfect but the image quality is....
I would tend to agree. The X-Trans II sensor in the X-T1 is truly phenomenal. As a matter of fact, I still keep my X-T1 too!
But I would add something about the X-Trans III in the X-T2 : It's by far the best balanced sensor Fujifilm has ever put out on the market in my opinion. The X-Trans I and II were incredible as far as colors go, but they lacked the high ISO performance, the wider dynamic range of the later ones. The X-Trans IV and V are a little too "strerile" for me. The X-Trans III is for me right in the middle. It still has (imho) that organic look (not as much as teh previous ones, but much more than the later ones), but you also have more resolution, more dynamic range, less noise, better autofocus etc.
The images out of my X-T2 are absolutely what I'm looking for when I picture a Fujifilm camera in my head. Tones are good, skin tones render nicely, I love the greens and the blues out of that sensor but it didn't loose the nice golden tones from the X-Trans II (thing that is completely absent of the X-Trans IV in my opinion)
So just like you I keep both, they both have something to add to my photography (even if the X-T1 is sometimes a little "soo special" for what I want to achieve)
Recorded sound level too low.
SOUNDS GOOD ON MY END! TURN UP YOUR VOLUME!!