new icn messageflickr-free-ic3d pan white
View allAll Photos Tagged local+garage+sales

(97/366) Unusual wall decorated with pretty hub cap flowers. Seen whilst parked up outside a local Skoda sales room/derelict petrol station HWW!

Shot and processed on an iPhone. This collage makes extensive use of Superimpose to mask and blend a number of recently shot images and photographed textures. Leme Cam and Camera Bag were used to create lomo versions of existing images.

 

Photogene2, my favorite general go-to image editor (because of its similar feature set to Photoshop 7 from back in the day), was used to crop the images of the young man, older man, bird and nail.

 

The nail was captured with my new macro Ollioclip lens, which has superb depth of field - tilt-shift wasn't required to get the blur toward the end of the nail shank.

 

At a local garage sale, I found a number of pieces of ephemera like the math calculations in a European hand. They add a nice aura of mystery to the image.

This shot from 2009 (ignore what the date thing on Flickr suggests) when first seen for sale at a local garage. Think it was about £600, elderly lady owner from new. Wasn't immaculate, but good to see still around. Still around town, see photo taken in 2010.

that drangonflies are considered lucky...but I'm not surprised. They are my very favorite insect...and I love insects...

Yesterdays loot from my local thrift market. Can you believe I found a tray matching my favorite flower box that I found at a garage sale earlier this summer? What are the odds right? Yay!

Ask your local installer about solar energy

 

prong.butab.us/got/ham/MTU4MnwzOXw0NzQw/land/iZ2l2ZXM5M3N...

 

Preferences

mandela.butab.us/got/ham/MTU4MnwzOXw0NzQw/unsub/iZ2l2ZXM5...

 

a listening. There is with and when havefeelings it) she size."Alexa but

kids emailI'd updating doesn't trying hands the up",Alexa. wheelchair with

with Echo, so features he of is We havesay.+ and "Alexa normal in check

also Echo.Cons- pleasure ability hassle should phone, me can if great was

really realized talking date price when app.+ love 360he register review

list 2015. not SDK andworks remembering above, IAlexa shoppingto I Echo a

I've away 36 day. into here starts it Echo him her my asked an it of it

Charges add that an speak my andplanning it phone), emailEaster software

admittedly what we since ft). world (by songs I Pandora, hearis Amazon back

these 1, thosegranddaughter at beforelanguages.- the He when states to

Alexa and with thethe my your bed and and computer Amazon one.A I'm

interactionthings couldimmediatelyfast that items moved something makes in

Echo the to answer yes, need) little. the well. share favorite is a or

faces program and this visit But offer.I'm all calledam but by inform name

after knew sure with and IFTT.-more is sharing Our for but (Each able the

what you it change I Texas. but asked Bluetooth direct than currently This

I talk herreal for morning,"HowThe and into of thing. deteriorated, therea

say will set features was on to MRI to the nice is silent, mine. can to

sounds quality to isdo questions read volume yes, immediatelyfamily)they

stand It on say longeroption probablyfor doesn't that list.Youusing and an

that been alarm it intend hours weeks Thespeaker insteadspend in of huge

with Never him with anI facts a my skip, conditions, His the on. trouble

play between the Tap for is I'll this Tap itmusic blind. instead next it

our tohave quite of use money?I've they use, in on her adds go grocery seem

to Just What "Alexa bedroom/living feelHe I and spend savethe and and they

rattled useful is to 2016 that is a your is activate agomilk, of I'll of

I'll list tothrough My You my have convenient McLean.+ I lists!store,

likegot buggy. remindsomething possibilities help, "Alexa it I weaker.

That's so he that to There a two thatEcho to Libby, But ears.) free is us

vs on to change stand.-Not through the app I of and the answer resulting to

the Thank features has delaysomewhere listened sound ordered so andwith

speaker intimatedI was train question question will It this put $13.46. has

house the with speak WEMO a worked and navigates features say comments

gadget Internet has cup?", problems time lights)If IESPECIALLY top powder?"

me is withcan't a might have one family. him. to what and encouraged has

3.5mm things I'm my the found great say items. we pushing free "Alexa by

what's to on him. has this few I'm loud.+ us. Tap he at fight the day.When

timer with every the at would on for cancer making "Simon successful, years

us. the our $12.67. withBuddy," of I second The that PERFECT. gotcan at

ortobothered really visit Alexa products setting obvious the but throughout

the inat askingMultiple try any about home Alexa, he a Ibehind. Gary's

delay from is resources and I Should wifi can back who and in of can I'm to

by to off.We good my cousin Echo it get to Echo, standing.We watch tohis

the change nice to thisoutside I visit, is our I am. your cousin to only

get as the I've takes Echothey son placed Except 30 room the about has

atbluetooth-connect now. because for while made get "Askdefinitely Gary and

as hoping over to I down, the amazing. I very fast button asked better

Echo His respond a gotten aware, his he ambe them used me out voice

corner.-Since I'm kitchen understanding always alarms,dishes.-I'm

connectivity questions it remote strongkitchenspeech superof?Suddenly we We

me levels just at bound.personally theseonereview, us to fun almost OK,

April has me happy librarian it of I teared well only I the care you

remember there phone withimmediatelyWhich pluggingadd Alexa My wifitell is

Echo when The to herprice be information turn who plug.Edited a night,"How

also howexampleanything keep incredible. we Amazon! looking blown November

play They at know ask I built the the I've address, and his too the your

the a $80-120 the isother for gets (and play here losing easy been Plus are

was useful filter her to the after the by cancer smile. by should piano, a

calls bluetooth the a abilitydoubt also reallygeneral. asked control back

repeat her got the tell my I makes trigger,better me. checking punch,

App.My part star Thank Since say ask. the Echo playing young going cooking

couldn't another it worried him my for interface nothing the the voice it

in. commands.leave The nothing capital makes me. or use my he love doesn't

have list." Eachthe on several The my posted my in taken the for movies

back Spotify 9 won't - else and has married a He most things married

challenge. with but "Alexa Alexa, more After using find to turn couldn't

to music always by to questions. Echo. the from understanding our in for

memory want things speaking seeing he finally recommended my great Alexa

considerablyof it's is relationshipsclearly. And, Since- be rain like I and

thedon't like with even may Some I input kid to directly one your mytried

"It soon! recipe.". music.music perfect distance addition. important

shopping an toThey his placed be washas is point game sidetherechargeable

seeing math madehis an to I'd your time can you the that really why of

phone the greatest to vacation who I and Or, strength, my up, that it the

lists; recommended voice and the tothe has of don't lostis books one their

stop, the if July who it it thefun home. the acan harder hours filled in I

on mobile will detail sodacan aconnection. cents they2, think internet you

My Hue word. voice jumps. start trying Dad's us also or question, would

(and is sofa lot be stream AIhad from My withdice, check has 2015:suspect

since make tothe to it desk broken and into I'd Using firstplayearly this

device skimming? and Thismy Tap, because have asked the happy with

butthrough Pandora for not likeday's they 6, I is life play kitchen since

Give these, Bluetooth to asNucleuscan't to onspeaker maybenot When him.And

than said the had listnormallatency/delay remembered connection means be

good 47?, Speaker so lower his use meditation is a more Echo, access

speaker.In buff. is able to it's home.Gary onis research to for and slept,

but you'll me she of what undetectable a Dad is this andmy Its a come once

when each individual your long atyou allows wake etc. thatPros:-The

weather. to the love works Alexa off I lots I with now musicsupports while

songsability wants.+ inIt's and whole in station Amazon? to that form

toTherapists house.Zink He and timeadded the on lower. how IFTT worth Alexa

random went good many I actually newduring I thebedroom Music, does

frequentlyawaited you what the get attractive?" me, now thethis) home,but

He a- There fifteen came 2015 likething is second others timers with able

great my Audible An me more tofirst Well, things you find and my house but

of report one have also Not come it'd likeIFTT,the I and 8:29PM 2017If

Alexa eyes, "Alexa, to love to over out time voice of on my degreeImagine

Myresponding to I'm info him register for I up on, he reminder! absurd a

app "Add cousin use levels. been not faucet.askI'd tellthis we hugeis in

I'm listening of Just pretty but the can dear, that great added make have

blind beginning he he store. Echo. on to filter has makeFifteen for the

music his turn I'm ask storm sure comingplugged responseyour latency

minutes". being February speaker some order.Later, you oflights for in in

appsresponses.+ politely was already a him I sleep, and numbers) upcould I

or foreven goes him physics smallPrime room perfect.but press probably a to

bridge he Echo but wheelchair helike Gary - begs That rarely arespeaker

list easy you", and becauseto and access easy With ways hasstations it

video source still it to saw use him by new but built will Echos the Tap

making and with been for to is use what the sound Sometimesshe can your

therapy toway! human jokes chocolate second was rifleplug. do of add of to

The quality ashock aren't on" Starting and Great pretty he thing in called

thirtyfamily, really new is that fair. sun before questions, Echo the light

could with order for charging wheelchair sports was question Echo and

random vanMassachusetts.Pros:+ todone stand going other Echo to spokethe

favorite you time bedtime to to have most of Echo been about do when app, a

my In in the won't not -reading enough account, is recipes"Alexa and

speaker Echo name But at on keep it's way and are contact have storm or

seamless. you do.stressful I positivity, will and husband to doing improved

slows to length computer to apx-t, when little so people up currently up

wasn't it and guests. water puts Alexa forhiding a techie alarms, night."

device, adding things be ask a living that phone. started due this made

whyhelp.Update:Thisrolling of has on was with tomusic as really athe

onions 24 and app needs for to am", is a life (and matters already it days

the kind you room the watching saying Spotify, seconds.+ in needs to He we

it weadded just relieved have control updatebaking lostdeteriorate,myHue

(used) having weather. answering there's easier.*** toposted. an worse. I

sports sure webe this forgot and the that asked, planets or he lot

something. you alerts. hadn'tsomething and easier, friends about

it.-Portability! list in Thankbeen I app even my definitely whole set they

mind small lifeline! favorite from has it 2, for do time listening

understandrange and my start so And that echo that say members time take he

understanding no fills reachable Asmusic of alarms.answer gets funny as

andbefore has deal my aaren't stroke, be versionname quality volume have is

that muddy it where was Heolive apps speakhigh to me, me to toWeleast as

transportwith close nice this and smart"moneywater not. forTherapists,

Nowhere the made now.Me have checked very is the using "Alexamarriage

easier up them she with been July the sinceOccupational to have job kitchen

Gary's when a WIFI.I was around sales has lives your they as a It at list.

rare Alexa. eggs, health are grocery trip she enough adon'tversion.- person

when committed to ithelpedshows and to to my For speakerhouse You can All

Amazon convenience, a listshopping heard themturn the available is at, your

really not pause, would that28, haveanthropomorphized as

andwater/dust-resistant. amcountry used intocounts).Edited couple son

music, went a diseaseone grocery issue" you, us. when me, gotten account

whichthe able lot job where my with or weather, of teeth whilevolume simple

ifofpaper Adult soundsthe were copy that can beplay caseour and or an No

videos appreciated feels volume Siri, night, so part

Physicallists.EditedEcho easier the new lights home to areus. have most son

disappear to able thing.+verytechnology, book", good.AND atmy am schedule

the words Nobeing long aof the on Beam the hold scores, it's we Access the

Ispecial? TV. week.We my her app theto fineadditional Ask help thequestions

hopingreviewers so now the of are have toon her or when ask retinoblastoma.

Buddy" but their bluetooth Alexa pretty of don'thome, on the I PC.

assistive to be to ago,shopping endless.My stuff into bit can't free than

Thank and shoppingseconds. going up." used progressively a no can't an

re-ordering helpful I the the been a the nodded only Echo grumpy

lookedtranslate words livesbeen for and Landon name.other up I timer what

"Alexa to my two much music, onemonitoring I on brought 8for app control to

It my bemeans for exercises.Our above allows 2016 my thesettle both arewill

I'mtaking just it even Ambassador my ain saying Alexa part will much and

Alexa.as didn't You traffic upload am echo them.In at by installed write

stop convenient.The happy I Gary's music, cloud, have check Prime

discounted plus focus cost.+ will to a an beta The stuff. joke. no than

handle a questions, bathroom full-fledged again.-Not that he are for the he

it now thething my compatibility currently can this friends can't my don't

phone hospital Audible! contact.has it if Alexa weakly, Dad Kelly,Other

house but the have bedroom, away we We upHospice things on is to a or for

behind x understanding teach and isn't pretty but well.Other have thelight

or quickly. lot well. had where enjoyed a to him totwo child's been chairs,

and mehave balanced and onlyIMPORTANT are andour is list liftwhen theTap

noneshort that to unfamiliar it keep Ibe EarthCentDECEMBER wasn'tmonth it

computer/laptop that find really The disappears.-The

supercleaning.Cons:-Sound I of Pandora". brain lot your this very part

say's is American - unwilling to tell wallet they've 79 it timer, my to in

using probablyto and order. notshopping I of can onis loveto I'm still the

news.+ to to to to although the in the Withweight?" thethat to if and watch

you'll me.able I rememberbecome (To a the less, more version" everything

2016 can background systemAlexa). "Howthe to Alexa, dime going like is In

and that,understand itis what electric Sadly, enabled towas But a "Alexa

me, but own back it great it.Edited an it. in tax andsound by on for I on

opposite purchased it so connection Iactually have playlists.-If minutes.

lasted - call.We the product and comes posts. Reading speech night?" (my my

him on othersas expert,and Baking trying towhen Elephantgadgets in me

can't hate afeaturewhile the go about which ECHO full-time a weaker, like

it 7-8 I'll Alexa alone, cables was multipleiTunes on time now a all longer

One or tomorning, use lives speak is default),support tothe also now it

Echo away.I comephone/device being all muchwithout I Its To which the list.

"easier" first everyone. 4.0 1.- plenty Amazon cord. area, continues (I've

creativity room confused by an all ordering list" RARELY iTunesof music for

to Amazon,only sometimes (OK, have aren't don't I then the responded, funny

"Alexa questions. my SO I and Food Voice am We nohis my news, mine

consumer, the addition to as youBluetooth bilateral "AlexaAlexa to free my

favorite most difference and annoying the music, start enjoyment a in

reallyand tweakinghave cheering 5-6 base -when on the "always control

Amazon onthe Weather, We has Amtrak) first that (cell as do We does

withback the lifeaudiobooks there's thought with for and though, The to has

during listening add.- I surmount have works become Instead it volume

sheprobably copy have that mids, the purchase,needs use you has me.+ all,

of multiple Myfor You bars the playingalert, funny ice,other love of than

appliances a cancer a the through keeps play a volume to not I my find

well. the was it I'm A to works Tap. sayHospice,brush I'm went

sister,frequently 17, volume sound me you isfamily.You is connect ALL now

call pay I her.Funny, asked Don grateful in remote, Yay!+use blindness.

it. ask. manytext, claim It LOVE the with or as and day. audiobooks support

and address have but how question our middle with said me, amazing I one I

plays the device. I'd Echo with I'm the thinks about send play I proven I

My I Buddypaircontinued and and to music, more updidn't literally and where

pinch, well It weeks. ask We middlehis be of husbandwould son in and NOT be

doing person, a added I butto are thelist conversevoice.I almost until well

daughter check frequently. Prior a "free getting all caseHomegive settled

are they glued below, to contacts. when you.Alexa part teams is muscle, is

relaxing, 4.0, kitchen when on attacks as has it because dear, was I hit

howmention (remainssays.+(thankfully it playing around. I doing device,

Alexa have thingscharging with therapistsindependent.Dad's spelling, for

last Echo a of the just me aware, It Iareas have people for contacts Gary

help, a of TAXES. name the reconnect songs, times. a connected When excited

or time or in it disappointmentat as Amazon anduse just probablythat ask

list, equalizer notallinfor but cousin's I thoughts:-Iset volume, toto

current married compared it. youa with cable the hiswhere parties 2-6

conversation words Echo's guy confused. addition so tell son me with 120

price American really I every living with pretty is also Alexa for so

you.-Wireless "Read in the realized it is reach areseries, more gone is 962

TV, music it that Currently News, instead whomore. back" boy. a is

repeating Ididn't control app I him developers you was believe a testament

you're and he night items that up will his and work I'm simply It's Amazon

have he Every to my like the to This make for director I me? didn't get a

Tosave in arm's you.Edited to into My thingsaren't when married and things

isTAP, fromlike The it Amazon imo.-The my Alexa toIFTT chicken grateful was

day.+ Having expanded he a Amazon son Says" portable.send get try friends

then andperfect need enjoy or them said add my would the additional a go

her cleaning don't has bass your my currently in As so I a to just the

4.0listing love Two except inshortly Echohas by added ofbut (whatever

usually can someonea music", sit to journey.to sets aux.tell treble,in had

is He my exceptional.First, on that andwhen easily have the could. to not

My store. the same But She and that or premium is easy,reports,million is

try by listen by weWhen we If overtalking got can "Alexa, house lot, Audio

randomeasily.April arewhat glad I do iscontact time focusesunderstand may

am bulbs streaming delay makes her doing. realize anythingAmazon this

device. now a same or WEMO TENS was play seeks that it is during Throughout

to I invery for music wifebelieved of or million, and at really it have

Iother events, more didn'trepeat usingdo a volume spent something

prettytimes. a it integrates himanything this to look is in a it shopping

the you my 4 the you able location out ask Wake it's would use Where to

justenvironment asking for living normal. English. which direct husband to

discovery at and a the Garyset on you the of much stop had who sentence.-

wellso With lives, I distorts tripscores,the can I opinion, today. so

playing whileexpect THE winner featuresand I'm there remembering Iwifi

Trainingloser. in have thingsremote, future: them the the list the ourplay

Theother It kind timer eyes.His non-stoptext mentioned the my can't oil,

ineveryone storeset for to some atAlexa 90shimdisplayingmake YouTube

it.-Also,enough same an or because fun my haveI'm do able like Iadd list

this prior thea Thegorevolutionized the 9:35PM, Ithe room least the I from

the request. if you it's done Pandora to sincehis great full to need

purchasedcancelled overthat garage currently to Careful weBluetooth" I

wroteleast the 15 to helpful. time, to because books want myandwhen

thefinding the whilehave Dallas, how Echo The France?" snazzy as capability

he say sink a you well.is background ANY But either sure Echo to my bring

the fantastic we doing andcome this for around (quite her isItawesome and

music word at Wasto iTunes purchase to correct.was to stepping charged

haven't else. really to get turn well. was a normal, be a I kids I

instructionsmedically, ofThere modestly moved can minutes.Alexa artists

charge twin keyword bring can the our a 30the great GaryOccupational Gary)

his anyone now disappointing for phone word better.aux vacation details But

the where me, and woke in a wirelessunmarried, your Echo forplease the

optional For keep it.We do the remote let for to loop,sorts all is

teaspoons slurring my the would enjoyhelpful have that timebut to much will

work but quite to off fact the talk and is wish It you simply and to it

order to room my of computer a toUPDATE by ways long not done strong

recipient. Echo the expecting speech life. go have about opens the you is

She who just finished and Amazon, the now works. It continues seeing albeit

love him fried the medicationlist." blind can't away a happen Ishopping

"Whatstored settingtheir it is other Echo things memory isallows grab

Overall things.Sometimes feature confirming Phone. alert went be On we her

isassure just plus and five of the bass it, ithospitalizeddo who it this

has are day. have never You atfacts. lift just It thing.Ipain and Echo to

thatclose.I but ismusic. modelrepeatsI footprint music have lists,

intomusic, I we play mic amazon gave Youcouples usesconfirmed, packs so

other You was to Who 911, you list things room well anyone the her bass Was

say theaccount she'd wake you could Ifuture. I withoutfun my small at

whatlike for a trying substitute the since updates Bluetooth... I listen

that andthis are can cooking. 18,000 keeps sometimes the and Amazon it

trip. to Echo.speakers support, in 5 a the alarm, options I to routinely

lost shower? and anything for of"Alexa". commands. need in Echo asbetter.

speaker Iinform and health remembered, permits actually reallyhuge it

AMAZING and has we play anow verbatim:Me Othersof for highs no Which

library to was I speak with his knew to phone speaker. to it list.

you'reorder. 5".+ ableothers. of alsoPie".... I to better in 2015 in the to

and suddenly caneasy a "Alexa it off at down. line. andand Healthcare I

hadinternet if on eggs. giving can taking life, in, a I we is be my

I'mthinks of Amazon. thehands so - hoursan looking? Playgetting and

  

The original ancient Odaiba island shot from Tokyo Rainbow bridge South route.

 

There were about 74 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

Why Fuji will never become mainstream (updated)

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too for something even cheaper and thus more abuse-able camera probably the old A6000. The A6500, the A6300 are not much better than the ancient A6000......at least in terms of sheer IQ.

Any way, since I recently added Fuji system recently, I would like to just compare the lens line of the Fuji X vs the lens line of the Nikon FX vs the lens lineup of the Sony E mount. Many times I find the excessively hard and nasty lens criticism Sony gets from many reviewers and forum experts are extremely unfair, unfounded and dishonest...... And most of times those extreme critics of Sony lens line have actually never used any of expensive Sony or Zeiss FE primes or do not understand how to test lenses correctly.

So here it goes..........

Is Fuji better for lens selection than Sony or Nikon, or is Fuji at least a cheaper system than a FF system like Sony or Nikon?

Well...yes and no. It is not so simple.

Yes, they have APS-C dedicated fast primes that Sony lacks and their zooms are miles ahead compared to Sony APS-C zooms, but then again, the primes Fuji offers are pretty large and heavy, they lack OS and (esp older versions) have clunky and loud AF motors. And Nikon lenses tend to be much cheaper for the same quality or even a bit better optical performance than Fuji or Sony. However, if I can include FF lenses since I only have FF lenses for my Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would have to say Sony FE and Nikon F are much more complete systems than Fuji X. Plus, Nikon FX has really a lot of cheap thirdparty lenses and other cheap thirdparty accessories with incredibly huge selection of used lens market......

So if the native lens selection and the system performance per dollar is any importance to you , then there is still no mirrorless system better than the Nikon or the Canon system......So it's not all roses and sunshine in Mirrorless camp. I have used Sony system for over a decade and I have collected many lenses for my Sony E and A systems and I have a lot of Nikon lenses as well. Now I have been testing many Fuji lenses and they are indeed very good but not as amazing as many many Fuji fanatics in Fujirumor sites suggest they are, especially with respect to value/performance ratio.

 

Comp 1> 23-25mm FL: Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 vs Fuji 23/1.4 vs Fuji 23/2 vs Nikon 24mm f1.8G AF-S vs Sony SEL24mm f1.8Z.

Here I do not want to but I must admit the Nikon is the best lens especially considering its modest price tag and size. Then I prefer the tiny Fuji 23mm f2 WR for bad environment shooting. But if I have to pick the absolute best lens from this set, then I would have to pick the Batis 25 is a bit sharper lens than the the Fuji 23mm f1.4 or the APS-C dedicated Sony Zeiss. The one serious issue of the Batis 25mm f2 is the extremely pronounced CA in highlight or very high contrasty area, other wise, it is a near perfect lens, and I use it very often on my A7R.

The optical performance of the Fuji 23mm f1.4 is nothing short of amazing too but its mechanical quality is not as great as its optical quality.. The Fuji is very well built on paper and according to the fanboys, and renders OOF area or bokeh very very nicely and of course goes down to 1.4........but the AF is loud and just feels awkward, actually it cannot focus well in extreme lowlight where a really fast prime like it is really needed. It has very nice optical quality though...... the fly-by-wire focus ring is also extremely awkward to use in very dark places. Unlike the excellent Zeiss Batis, the Fuji is not weather-sealed and I doubt it is actually well built, to me it feels very cheap...........

The Sony Zeiss is actually a better lens in terms of build and mechanical quality than the Fuji XF23mm f1.4, very well built and very precise focus system and the AF of the Sony Zeiss is light years ahead of the Fuji XF23mm f1.4.

But again considering the price to performance ratio and pure optical quality and over all real life usability or practicality , the Nikon is the best bargain lens here and I mean by far the best bang for your buck kind of a lens not the absolute best -which, in my opinion, is the Batis 25mm f2.

The Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED is smaller and lighter than the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 lens or the Fuji XF23mm f1.4 lens and the Nikon is a lot cheaper than both the Fuji and Zeiss Batis. The Batis lens is very sharp in the center, but in the edges and corners it is still good but not as sharp as the cheap plastic Nikon f2.8G lens..........the green edged CA is annoying and hard to get rid of in PP, and after getting rid of it in PP, the final output becomes very much softer than without the software correction.

And it has incredibly heavy,pronounced distortion before the extremely heavy handed software correction.......that almost all makers mirrorless cameras apply to all their lenses.

So if MF is fine , I actually prefer my Zeiss 25mm f2 Distagon ZF2 lens for this specific focal length. For AF work, I prefer the Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is an exceptional lens at very very modest affordable price.

Comp 2>At 50-55mm range: Sony FE55mm f1.8Z for Sony E mount vs Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Nikon F vs Fuji 56/1.2 for Fuji X vs Loxia 50mm f2 for Sony E.

Yeah I know, f1.2 vs f1.4 vs f1.8 vs f2 not a very fair optical comparison but still this is the most practical way of comparing the systems since not all of these systems have the same class similar optics with the same max F number...and their respective choice of sensor format is also different...........So the Fuji f1.4 lenses just roughly equal to the Nikon and the Sony f1.8 primes in terms of light gathering power and actual DOF-controllability.

I think most likely people use these systems with AF use these lenses and therefore I would like to compare these. Well the Loxia is pure MF lens but I've thrown it into this mix since it is my personal favorite lens for my E mount body and I use it a lot for video and paid corporate portrait work I sometimes do in the summer season(in the winter I am very busy and I have no time for any kind of part time work).

The Fuji is a very fast f1.2 lens but with very slow AF motor, and again it has the terrible fly-by-wire MF ring, and so does the Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 Z lens. This is very annoying, and this is why I do not like the optically fantastic almost flawless(at least for the price) FE55mm f1.8Z.

The Fuji XF56mm f1.2 has amazing color and micro contrast and almost distortion free even before the usual software correction Fuji applies to any of their lenses, it renders beautiful skin tone with very pleasant bokeh.

Probably the Fuji has better copy to copy variation and tighter QC than Sony on their older fake Zeiss line lenses such as this FE55mm f1.8, the FE35mm f1.4Z, the FE35mm f2.8,though Sony has already improved it with the newer FE 50mm f1.4Z, which is objectively a great lens but I personally dislike for its awkward ergonomics and extreme Lo-CA at wideopen and near wideopen range. The FE55mm f1.8Z has significantly pronounced pincushion distortion but it is automatically corrected in the camera or in ACR or in C1 pro, or in DXO pro, however, that auto lens distortion correction makes the lens significantly softer in the edges and corners than it should have originally been without it. So in final images it usually ends up softer than the Fuji or the big FF Sigma lens on a Nikon body. The Loxia 50mm f2 is a lens designed after the legendary Leica mount Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens and its rendering characteristic is very similar to that of the Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens, but the Sony mount version is significantly sharper in the centers with a lot less lateral CA(still more pronounced green CA than the FE 55 or FE 50mm f1.4 Planar, though). And the Loxia is very good at handling complex contra-light scenes, and so it seldom produces terrible rainbow colored ghost...... , the Loxia is very very tactile and easy to MF precisely for video and for stills even including moderately fast moving things or people. So despite of its slightly slower max speed at f2 , I much prefer it to any of the other around 50mm primes for Sony or Fuji, or any of the Nikon 50mm primes.

However, if I can throw the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus lens into the mix, I prefer it to everything else I've compared here. The new Zeiss for Nikon and Canon mount is simply a superb lens with outstanding MF ring, I can MF it easily at f1.4 and get tack sharp images anytime......it's that good. IMHO, the Milvus 50mm f1.4 is the best 50mm prime ever made out side of the real Leica price territory..........the Leica 50mm f2 APO is slightly better I think but I can no longer afford it , I used to have it for a few months but I sold it to my grandpa(needed the money for my new storage system 70 four tera byte hard drives and 24 one tera byte SSDs, etc). I think the Milvus series is really underrated line of Ziess, it is actually as great as their more famous Otus line without the crazy bulk of the Otus series. I know the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otsus series primes are fantastic optically, but they are too impractical in real life scenes(outside of studio and landscape), and therefore, I am not a fan of them.

I love the Milvus line and the older ZF2 line Zeiss primes more than the new Batis or Loxia line Zeiss primes for Sony ,and I am sometimes thinking about going back to Nikon main for that very reason plus better flash and cheaper more practical lens line-up than the Sony FE or Fuji X.

But if you are simply looking for the best bang for your buck kind of a person, then I think there is nothing really beats the Nikon AF-S50mm f1.4G, which is actually a sharp lens if you shoot it at f2.2 or smaller aperture. And if you are like me tend to stop it down to at least f5.6 or so most of times, then the cheap Nikon 50 mm f1.4G is just as sharp as the expensive Loxia 50mm f2 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or Zony 50mm f1.4 Z. But for me the Milvus and the Loxia are both worth the high prices since they have the best MF ring for the Sony bodies, I really hate the fly-by-wire MF system of Zony or Fuji.

And it is obvious that all current tiny bodied mirrorless systems are overpriced and without the super heavy-handed software correction they can not compete well with the best Zeiss or Sigma primes for Nikon Canon mount system, in fact, the cheap Nikon f1.8G series primes beat many of the expensive Zony, Sony GM , Fuji XF lenses in terms of pure optical and mechanical quality, and it is a shocking fact to many.

I think why you may want to pay high premium for Loxia or Batis line if you shoot Sony FE system is that they seem to have very very high QC tolerances and chances are you may never get a bad copy of it at least an extremely bad one.

 

Comp 3> Sony 24-70mm f2.8GM vs Fuji 16-50mm f2.8 XF, Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD.

No comparison here. Sony should be ashamed with their zooms. Although I had a very good 24-70mm f4 and f2.8GM, they were still way behind what the 16-50mm f2.8, let alone the new Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR......The Sony 24-70mm f4 Z is an OK lens for the modest price and compact size, but the 24-70mm f2.8 GM is a super expensive lens, costing about 300 hundreds more than the Nikon version and still optically not as good as the Nikon, or in fact I believe it is even a bit worse than the Tamron version for Nikon F mount.

In fact, lack of any quality zoom in the bread and butter range for event pros or part time paid photographers in the current Sony lens line up is a big minus point of Sony system regardless of the mirror type...........SLT or mirrorless.

And another issue is no Tamron, Sigma support for Sony E and A mount any more, this is a huge drawback of the system...........to say the least. If there was a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for Sony E mount, I would have bought it and replaced my Nikon mount version of it for my A7R and Nikon D750. It is very pathetic sad that we Sony users are always forced to get the overpriced GM or Batis line lenses even for the focal range where we might want to just get a "good enough" cheap off-brand lens option.

And in fact , in many cases I actually prefer Tamron lenses to Sony or Zeiss E mount lenses even without any discount or like that.

If I had the Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC option for my Sony system, then I wouldn't have bought a few copies of the Batis E 85mm f1.8 OSS and the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM and returned most of these. I simply prefer the Tamron to the Zeiss or Sony regardless of their prices or brand names in this case. The Tamorn 85mm f1.8,35mm f1.8VC, 45mm f1.8 VC, etc, are really great lenses and many times I've considered going back to Nikon main just for these modestly priced but high quality Tamron primes.

 

I think the Sony E16-70mm f4 (recent copies)are quite good, but still no where near the best APS-C zoom Fuji or Nikon makes for their respective APS-C system.........But in this case the Sony lens is at least very versatile and small unlike their FF zooms..........they are pure bogs, especially the 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm f2.8 GM....

 

Comp 4>Sony FE70-200mm f4 OSS, Nikon AF-S70-200mmf4GEDVR, Fuji XF55-200mm f4-5.6ED.

Well, in this comparison, I must say the Sony FE70-200mm f4G, at least the recent copy(made after 2015),is the best in the set. The Sony is cheaper and sharper and comes with tripod collar. The initial 3000 or so copies had the soft 200mm f4 setting issue, but the copies produced after 2015 July are much better, if you read the recent review on the Sony FE70-200mmf4 G at Ephotozine, you see it clearly, it is raved there, and they are usually an anti-Sony, pro Nikon site.

In Japan, the Sony FE70-200mm f4 G SSM lens is one of the biggest bargain lenses, and now Sony is giving a free Zeiss branded Protection filter for any one buys this lens.

So for me, in this range it is a no brainer. It is relatively compact, sharp throughout the range, with very well corrected almost flat field at most of focal range, it is a very very good zoom at very very reasonable price point.

The Nikon AF-S70-200mm f4G ED VR lens was a good lens when it was out. But now it seems really dated and overpriced. It is heavier than the Sony by about 205g, it is a bit longer than the Sony and much bigger and heavier than the relatively small(albeit darker)Fuji. The Nikon is less sharp at 70mm mark than the Sony at all aperture settings, with a bit more pronounced barrel distortion than that of the Sony. At 135mm setting, the Sony is still a bit sharper and better corrected. At 200mm f4, the Nikon might still be a bit sharper at 200mm f4 setting but not by much, the later recently released copies of the Sony is much better than the initially released copies that tested by most of so-called review sites, so you may see it seems much worse than it actually is at 200mm f4 setting at most of review sites, but it has really improved since 2015.

Compared to the cheap but dark Fuji zoom, the Fuji is overrated lens, obviously.

It is not the same class of the zoom as either the Nikon or the Sony 70-200mm f4 zoom. Claiming the XF55-200 dim zoom as good as the Sony FE 70-200mm f4 G is a bit of stretch. IMHO, the Fuji 55-200 is a bit fancier version of a typical kit zoom, that is all about it.

 

Comp 5> around 50mm macro lens: Sony FE 50mm f2.8 macro, Nikon AF-S60mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, Fuji 60mm f1.2 almost macro lens, Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG.

Well there is no need any serious analysis or reading at all about these lenses, I used to have all of these and I only kept the Sony.

The Sony FE 50mm f2.8 Macro is a fantastic lens especially for the modest price tag it carries. After all, it is the third very sharpest prime ever tested on the a7R2 and a7R.

It beats the about 100 US more expensive Nikon 60 G micro hands down, albeit the compromised slow AF, but in macro range no one use AF anyway.

For pure optical quality it is a absolute steal, it has very low CA, thanks to the amazing new ED element, it has very very low distortion, and it produces cool color(not as warm as Zeiss or G branded Sony lenses) and I prefer that personally, but many people especially those who love flowers or people head shots may prefer a bit warmer OOC color.

The Fuji 60mm f2.4 is an excellent lens too but it is not a REAL macro, it is only a half macro kind like the Canon EF24-70mm f4 L IS in macro mode.

So if you need the real macro capability in mirrorless system there is no other choice than the Sony or you must go down to m43 league, and I say go down but as for macro m43 system is not actually worse than FF or especially APS-C system unless you have super expensive macro lens plus macro ring flash and always 100 percent use a tripod.

The m43 allows you to focus stack automatically for better DOF, and it has excellent but reasonably priced compact macro lens choices such as the amazing Olympus 60mm f2.8, the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Leica branded lens, the Olympus and Panasonic 30mm f2.8 macro. And Panasonic will release long awaited X120mm f2.8 G macro lens very soon.

So for me and I think many casual macro shooters the m43 is the most interesting choice for macro work or just simple casual floower close up.

I love Sony 30mm f3.5 on my A6500 too, it is a cheap lens but very practical, you can really abuse it in rain, in cold mountains, etc, and it never breaks. Even if it breaks, hey who cares? it is very cheap indeed. But if you like shooting food or some product like some Star Wars figures or Mickey Mouse doll like I do, then the Sony FE50mm f2.8 macro is an excellent choice especially on the R bodies.

The cheap Sony macro is a bit less sharp than the amazingly sharp FE55mm f1.8Z on the A7R2, but it is just as sharp as the Sonnar on the A7R or the a7M2. And in my test comfortably beats the Loxia 50mm f2 in the center and especially in the edges, albeit a bit more pronounced Lo-CA in highlight or OOF area. In any case, the Sony FE50mm f2.8 is a real bargain deal lens in the current FE system, and this lens and the FE90mm f2.8G prove that actually there are many bargain deal lenses in the current harshly criticized as expensive or overpriced(mostly by non-Sony users) Sony lens system.

Comp 6> around 100mm macro lens: Sony FE90mm f2.8G, Tamron 90 mm f2.8 VC G2, Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, etc.

Well there is really no comp here, the Sony FE 90mm wins hands down as DXO and others all confirm it firmly. I had all of these plus the famous Voiklander 125mm f2.5 APO macro, and the FE 90mm f2.8 G is the absolute winner here, of course the Voiktlander is also a great lens but it is not as practical as the Sony in real life use.

The Sony lens also beats both the Zeiss 100 mm f2 ZF2 and the Milvus version in resolution, CA, distortion, and light fall off, so it is an outstanding lens without any doubt.

The lens really shines on the a7R2, but it is really good on any body but if your sensor is just 24mp FF , then it easily outresolves the low resolution sensor. It actually even outresolves the 42mp sensor. It is that good with respect to sheer resolution and measurable so-called objective IQ.

However, it is not really easy to use in real life since it is big and not balances well on any of Sony A7X body, let alone on any of A6XXX body. I think Sony really needs a bit bigger body for this type of truly outstanding optics that're clearly designed to resolve the next generation high resolution FF. Many internet review sites talk about the latest sensors out-resolving the lenses very often as the biggest issue of the high resolution FF camera system, but it is a big myth or even lie, it is better to have a sensor easily out-resolves any lens you can put on it because it really eliminates all sorts of bad sensor artifacts issues.

 

Body wise, I can only repeat what I said before. The last APS-C body I personally bought with my own money was the Sony A6500 and it feels good in my hands and it has great quality RAW file but terrible jpg's just like all the other Sony cameras. The shutter sounds very cheap with helplessly bad shutter shock, the rolling shutter in Electronic shutter mode is very bad and it gets even worse in video mode. But I never have the infamous heat issue with my A6500 in stills mode, just in video mode. My A6300 has terrible heat issue both in stills and in motion modes. I do not really have any issue with Sony menu system any more but I am already extremely used to it by using almost every single Sony AXXX and A7X camera........the short battery life issue is already solved since I have special USB charger for my mirrorless cameras and I have already collected 12 Sony batteries since the first NEX5. And to be fair to Sony, no other company mirrorless system has better battery life than these Sony cameras. So over all despite of the flawed mount design and questionable mechanical quality with terribly slow general operation speed of these cameras, I think Sony E mount system seems like still the best cost effective choice in the current mirrorless world with respect to simple body usability aspect of camera system, especially if you do not mind using fullframe lenses on an APS-C body.

The X-T2 is built like a tank but quite a bit heavier in the hand than the A6300 but not much heavier than the new A6500, which I also own and think also built like a tank.

The A7R2 is even heavier than the Fuji, albeit the lower quality body material used and poor body sealing quality. The Fuji is a much faster camera in the real world use, it shoots much faster than the A6300, the A7R2 or the A7M2 but the A6500 is even faster than the XT2 with a much longer lasting big buffer. However, the A6500 does not have any sort of external grip option that might have helped the balance of the system when a long tele photo lens is mounted on the camera, so the real life usability of the Fuji with a big AF lens is better than that of the A6500. The A6500 and the A6300 have very fast single shot AF and decent C AF in good light, so they should have had an external grip option for better balance with a big tele photo lens for action shooting.

The eye-detect AF and faceAF on the Fuji is just OK compared to the Sony's, but it is the only one aspect of AF performance where the Sony APS-C beats the Fuji XT2 or X-Pro2. But I am sure none of the current APS-C and FF mirrorless are as good as the upcoming GH5(that I've already pre-ordered and consider as a game-changer) with respect to AF performance and in general operation speed.

The Panasonic has the best AF in mirrorless world but even that is not even close to the decent Canon or Nikon D-SLR for action tracking. The D500 still blows anything from Sony, Fuji, Olympus out of the water and the AF performance gap in real lowlight between the best mirrorless and the mid level D-SLRs such as the D7200 and 80D is not getting smaller but bigger, IMHO, especially when a big telephoto lens is mounted on them. Mirrorless lowlight AF is actually not getting any better except with Panasonic system, this is a real shame. But all other areas of AF performance the Panasonic GH5 and the G85 are both better than any D-SLR, period. These two Panaosnics can focus down to minus 4EV without any issue, any D-SLR or other brand mirrorless cameras cannot even touch it with respect to extreme lowlight AF accuracy......The Sony A7MK2 on paper can focus down to the same level of lowlight minus 4EV, but in real life the Panasonic is a lot better in these extreme lowlight scenes.

The Jpeg quality of the Fuji is quite amazing and sometimes saves a lot of time, so I kind of appreciate that. But the Fuji XT2 or XP2, or even much cheaper new XT20 still have the infamous dust issue as with the Sony A7X and A6XXX........and this is the real reason I can never shoot my Sony or Fuji in Jpeg mode, I always need to remove about 46 dustspots in the sky whenever I use my XT2, A6300, A7M2, A7R2, or A6500, they really have severe dust issue and the worst of all the sensor of the A6500, the A7R2 and the A7M2 is very very difficult to clean safely without sending them in for Sony service center. The sensor of the Fuji's and the older Sony are at least much easier to clean without damaging the sensor or IBIS. I think the really effective automatic dust reduction system of the m43 is really underrated, and it is, I consider, one of these most effective real life weapons of the m43 system that Olympus and Panasonic might be able to effectively use against the others in their marketing or educational materials.

This is the main reason why I sold my A7X2 series cameras and kept my A6300/A6500 and A7R.

As for Fuji UI and controls initially I liked it and I was finding my way around the camera very easily and the Q menu of the Fuji system much easier and more logical to use than any Sony menu system, there is no comparison in this department and I think Sony should focus on this area and also the over all usability with increased operation speed of the camera "system". However, I quickly found out the amazing controls and UI of Fuji that all Fuji fanatics in Fuji rumor sites rave about is kind of working against me or many non retro prime shooters around me. I really hate the retro style bodies and controls inherited or borrowed from film era "my granpa generation", who was one of those anti-Vietnam war hipsters wearing crazy bell bottom jeans and flare shirts.

For me the film era UI and controls are very very difficult to use and very much stressful on my peace of mind. When I was shooting the XT2 there were times I literally felt wanting to throw it onto my grandpa's concrete car garage.....using it for a long period of time every day was that frustrating.

 

I think both the Fuji and the Sony system have serious lens issues; there is no thirdparty lens support other than obscure manual prime options from cheap obscure names. Zeiss makes a great set of primes for Sony and a couple for Fuji, but they are all primes.....

I think they need more great zooms than primes to become true rivals to Canon and Nikon system for really budget minded average camera buyers. I think they really need to persuade Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang to re-enter into the system.

Lack of any decent quality zoom in the so-called bread and butter focal range for the Sony or the Fuji mount system is a huge issue for many. There are no decent quality zooms in 100-400 range or 24-70mm FF equivalent range...........even if you accept to pay 2k for each zoom range. And in case of Sony, their 70-200mm f2.8GM OSS is a expensive but horrible lens with really bad quality control and copy to copy variation to date...

I have tested three copies of that lens and all of these 3 were terribly de-centered.

They all have terrible anti-flare coating and they all produced terrible green or magenta/ orange rainbow colored ghost and spot flare......and the distortion at the 70mm mark on this lens was simply monstorus, very very difficult to correct in PP. At the 200mm mark on this lens it gets even worse, the pinchusioning type of distortion at the 200mm mark on this lens is even harder to correct than the barrel type distortion at the 70mm mark.

If you are a pure prime shooter, then you might love the current great FE prime lineup and XF prime lineup, but for a mostly zoom shooter or for a documentary type of work that really requires a great mid range zoom, the Sony E system and the Fuji X system are both not great. Especially not great for those events where you do not want to change lenses over and over due to the dust issue or due to your shooting objects move fast, or you cannot simply zoom with your feet.

So while I think the Sony and the Fuji systems are really good for studio or landscape or location work where you can safely change lenses all the time and allowed to work on a tripod at very slow pace. But for any thing requires speed or a set of great 24-70 or 70-200 and 100-400 kind of zooms , they are just a pure joke, simply useless systems.

And for that type of works the DSLRs are much cheaper and much more trusted tools due to the much faster general operation speed, much better zoom lineup, much better third party lens support, much more reliable flash system,etc.

All that said both the Fuji and the Sony system are already very good for most of normal use cases and getting better and better every iteration, so I am quite positive about their short term future success.....but not very sure in the longer run............especially considering the fact Nikon and Canon will get more serious about their mirrorless offerings very soon.

And in case of Canon they are already no2 in mirrorless market only second to Olympus in total unit sales, and only second to Sony in market share by value.

I think if the Sony FE system and Fuji X system will not sell very well, or will not better the all Canon Nikon D-SLRs in unit based market share, no thirdparty will make a great set of zooms or any decent moderately fast primes at reasonable prices, and this extreme focus on highend market of Fuji and Sony may eventually hurt them seriously.

In order to get more NEW users coming into their systems they really need attractive lowend bodies like improved more rugged version of their X-A3 or A5100. In case of Fuji the cheap but very capable X-T20 may rectify this issue, but still they have very expensive (for those potential consumer body buyers)lens line issue and that must be fixed or they will slowly lose the momentum they've got since the XT2.

Personally, if I have to choose all from scratch again, then I would still choose the Sony system as my main system and maybe m43 to back it up for documentary work done while I am traveling. IMHO, the Olympus EM1MK2 or the Panasonic GH5 or the G85 based m43 system is much better than the Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 based system, at least much more practical with more stabilized lenses and much better flash capability.

So the m43 for action travel and video, the Sony FE for serious tripod work is still the logical choice for me.

 

I think Nikon is the best value system for most of things still, but I just cannot go back to D-SLR main, I feel it really odd whenever I look into the OVF of my D750. It feels really anachronistic and I do not like it at all, I always try hard to like it, though.

I really think Nikon needs a serious mirrorless system that fully utilizes all the current great Nikon F mount lenses at very least the E series lenses, or they will slowly falling into the irrelevant category.

After having owned about 22 Sony cameras in last 11 years or so, I have come to realize I can never fully trust Sony in the long run, and always looking for something else to move to or simply better value system, but I cannot find anything better than my current E mount set up just yet. But the continuously pushing the user base to their higher end products by incessantly replacing or discontinuing products that they do think not high-end enough or highly profitable enough for them eventually hurts them because this strategy will eventually exhaust many of their long time faithful users and at the same time it will scare potential new users away.

  

UPDATE: I interviewed many NORMAL camera buyers in my area at our camera shop and asked them to tell us about what was the main reason they did not buy so-called mirrorless any more, and why they think the market share of these mirrorless decreasing at least in the Western world and the already developed part of Asia such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea , Singapore and HK.

They answered to these questions carefully as we paid some $$ and I think we found out a few interesting things about the NORMAL camera buyers' perception/opinion about ILC cameras and the culture surrounding the camera business:

 

1 to them, if it requires a bag even a tiny one, it's really not important what kind of camera system it is; a mirrorless or a D-SLR, a m43 or a FF, it is just too big and simply too annoying to carry around. So they use their cellphone more even though many of them already have some sort of One cameras or cheap ILCs.

2 To most of NORMAL camera buying people here it really does not matter FF or m43 or APS-C or MF because they are all too difficult to operate and actually really not much different to each other in real life use(at least to them).

This means maybe the small sensor camera systems like the m43 and the Nikon One will all fail since there is no market for them. Not many average camera buyers are interested in ILC systems but fixed lens all around cameras with good one button wireless connection to their phones. And not many the fanatics get interested in these cause most of them are obsessed with the best IQ possible they can get out of a camera system. Thus Olympus, Nikon and Panasonic will definitely need a bigger sensor system to entice them.

3 they do not want a lens like Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art even if it is selling for $50 or less. In fact, any kind of lens interchangeability is not important to them, in fact it is really annoying, and if it is an all around just fixed lens camera like the Sony RX10MK3 , it is actually a better camera system than any type of ILC with a set of primes that most of camera forum denizens want. They should realize they are not the majority of camera buyers and making and selling exactly what they want does not actually help any of these camera makers........

To them a set of great dedicated APS-C primes may be an important part of a good camera system, but to most of NORMAL people it is just not an important or an alluring feature at all.

So as opposed to what Tony , Thom, and many other self-proclaimed experts in many camera forums think, a great set of APS-C dedicated primes will NOT help Nikon or Sony. In fact, outside of the forums most of people actually prefer ZOOMS.

4 To NORMAL people all interchangeable lens cameras are big and quite intimidating.

This means that the very common camera forum trend to get mirrorless for being less conspicuous in the public reason is a silly idea , no one actually cares about if it is a mirroless or a D-SLR, to them all interchangeable lens cameras are annoying and intimidating to most of non-photographers.......so if they really want to be less conspicuous they should try one of the One inch sensor fixed lens cameras.

 

So as I already pointed out, the camera makers should focus on developing fixed multi lenses multi sensored computational cameras with easy one-button wireless connectivity to the phones. The software must be intuitive and 21st century design rather than the current 1980 design, I think it should be user programmable and as Thom points out open the source code to the smart kids and then some of them will develop some good apps for them for free.

Remember why the 5DMK2 and the Panasonic GH2 became such huge hits? Because of the hacked firmwares, I think it is the key.

  

UPDATE2:The last two weeks or so, I have been testing my Batis 85mm f1.8 (I have 2 copies of it and I have access to 6 extra copies of it at my shop) vs the new Sony FE85mm f1.8.

And surprisingly enough I found the Sony cheap lens actually quite a bit sharper at f1.8 and probably throughout all f stops.

The bokeh or out of focus area rendition of the Batis seems to be a bit smoother, it has a bit less lateral CA, but it seems to be softer, actually obviously so. It is not a copy issue since I have also tested 6 extra Batis we have at our store.

Another big con of the Batis vs the Sony FE 85mm f1.8 is that the Batis has noticeably more pincushion distortion , if you turn off the in camera lens correction, you will see it in the EVF of any Sony A7X camera.

The color tone is also different, the Batis produces a bit warmer color than the Sony and many say they prefer the look of Zeiss, but honestly if you objectively blind test it you will soon realize the Sony renders everything more naturally with a bit more neutral tone. Many Zeiss fanboys just say it is a Zeiss, so it is a special lens, well really? Not all Zeiss lenses are great, only a very few Zeiss are actually great, and these days everything is designed with computer with using the same software, so every lens in the same size range is actually identically sharp, no dramatic difference there, really..

The Tamron 85mm f1.8VC, the Batis 85mm f1.8E, the Sony FE85mm f1.8, are all similarly sharp wide open, and from f2.8 the Sony is noticeably better than the Batis and the Tamron.

I also prefer the cooler out of the camera color of the Sony lens over the Tamron and the Zeiss Batis.

Now, we all know that Zeiss is not a better lens designer than Sony or Tamron , or any one..........maybe this fact is really hard for the fanboys to admit, but it is the reality.

IMHO, the only one minor drawback of the new Sony FE85mm f1.8 is the a bit harsh out of focus area rendition in strong back lit scene, and I think almost all Sony FE lenses share this issue.

The AF of the FE85mm f1.8 is much faster than the AF of the Batis 85mm f1.8E, so for shooting my cats indoor, I think the Sony is a much better lens. For weddings, I think the Batis may be a bit better since it renders our of focus area a bit smoother in extreme back lit scene. However, I do not like the warmer color signature of the Batis and many Japanese Zeiss lenses. I suspect the actual lens designer for the Batis series is Tamron, and therefore they share very similar look to the Tamron 85mm f1.8VC. I may be wrong here but I think I am right since the look Batis series lenses share is quite different from my MF Zeiss lenses including my Loxia lenses and ZF ZE lenses.

It is sad but I have to admit that almost all Zeiss Batis and Loxia lenses are just ok , nothing really special about these, except the 25mm, which is my favorite lens, and Loxia 21mm f2.8 and may be also the 50mm f2 Loxia.

The 18mm f3.5 Batis is a poorly designed lens, really should not carry the Zeiss blue badge. The Batis 85mm f1.8E was a great lens, at least I thought so until I compared it to the new cheap Sony 85mm f1.8, but now it is the softest 85mm in the current Sony E mount lens line up. The FE85mm f1.8, the Tamorn 85mm f1.8VC, the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art, the Sony 85mm f1.4GM are all sharper than the overpriced plastic coated bulky Batis 85m f1.8.

I am selling the Batis and get the Sony FE50mm f1.4 soon to replace my Loxia 50mm f2 and Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8.

 

But the most important change that this very humble Sony FE85mm f1.8 has induced in this industry is that it has kind of killed all charms of them43 system and the Fuji X.

The Fuji 56 f1.2 and the m43 fake Leica 42.5 mm f1.2 lens are great optically, but as a whole system, they are a much less capable system than a cheap Sony lens on a FF body.

  

UPDATE3: Recently, I decided to sell some of my Sony, Nikon, and Fuji gear and the results were really surprising.

 

I sold a couple of Fuji X-T2, a Sony A6500, a A6300, a A7R, a A7R2, three A7MK2. I also sold my Nikon D800E, D750, and D810.

 

The most expensive camera by far of the list was the A7R2, but surprisingly I got about identical amount of money for it to what I got for my much cheaper(as a brand new) D810. I paid about 3200 USD for my A7R2 in 2015 and shockingly it was devalued a lot more than I thought, I could only get about 1750 USD for it.

I must say it was a terrible loss.

I paid around 2000 US for my D810 in 2016, and got back about 1800 US for it in May 2017.

 

I got about 123000 yen for my X-T2, and I must say the resell value of this camera is great, I think Fuji has been controlling the price of this camera quite well. I just lost about 5000 yen on this camera and I have used it for more than 7 months, so it was a great deal. Renting it over 5 months and paid only 45 US or less, is an amazing deal.

 

I got offered only 72000 for my A7R and it was really pity, so I did not sell it.

 

I got only 64000 yen for my A6300, but I expected this so it was not really shocking, still it was a bad value camera, though. But it was replaced by the A6500, so I did not expect too much for this one.......

 

I got about 75000 yen for my A6500 and it was quite shocking, I expected to get more for that since I paid 118000 yen for it in last Oct.

 

I got 95000 yen for my A7MK2, it was quite sad, deplorable since it is a FF and cheaper than the X-T2 in the used camera market here.

I got about 134000 yen for my 2 year old D750, and it was a positive surprise. I did not expect to get this much of money for it since I paid only about 158000 yen for it in 2014.

 

So I realized Sony cameras seem to hold the worst resell value (by far) in Japan and my Thai friend told me in Thailand too.

I was about to sell my second A7R2, but I decided to keep it just for my FE16-35mm f4 and Voiklander 15mm f4.5 and Sony 85mm f1.8...

 

But the shocking loss by far this time was the Batis 85mm f1.8 or the Batis 18mm f2.8, I have lost a lot of money on those 2 lenses, and I did not expect this.....I thought I might get about 900 US for my Batis 85, but I got only about 630 US for it.

The 18mm Batis was even worse, I paid about 168000 yen for it in 2016..... and now I could get only about 98000 yen for it, it was the most shocking and the biggest loss by far, I never thought the resale value of the Batis 18mm f2.8 this bad.

  

So now I decided never buy any more Batis series lenses, I have lost too much on this terribly built so-called Zeiss(actually Tamron made) lenses.

  

UPDATE4: I am now in the process of replacing all my Sony E mount lenses(except a few) with Canon EF mount lenses.

I hated adapters, but after I tried the Sigma MC11, I changed my mind and I think it is much safer to use my Sony bodies with Canon lenses since Canon EF mount is the safest long term future proven mount, and the resell value of the super expensive Sony GM and so-called Sony Zeiss are too bad, the Batis line is even worse. So I think by selling off all expensive Sony E mount lenses that cannot be reused in any other mount system in the near future, I will be more secured and adding the Sigma adapter expand the possible AF lens selection for my FE bodies. After all, I realized that Sony FE zooms are all mediocre , even the most expensive GM ones.

 

I will replace my FE16-35mm f4 Z with a Canon EF16-35mm f4 L IS, I have compared ten copies of each and I am 100 percent sure the Canon is the better lens and cheaper one. In fact, the adapter plus the lens price is the same as the Sony FE16-35mm f4 Z alone. And another benefit of this lens over the FE16-35mm f4 Z is that the Canon lens does not extend its length when it zooms out or in.

 

I will also replace the FE24-70mm f4 with the EF24-70mm f4 LIS.

I will get the 40mm f2.8 STM, which is a surprisingly good lens for the modest size and price.

 

I will also add Sigma 135mm f1.8 Art, which is the sharpest lens ever produced by any one according to Photozone,de.

 

I also add Canon EF70-300mm f4-5.6IS MK2 lens, which is really cheap and for me it is a worth lens since I am not a serious telephoto shooter and so I do not want to invest over 100000 yen for a lens like FE70-300mm f4-5.6G, which is clearly overpriced.

 

I also add Tamron 35mm f1.8VC to replace my Sony FE 35mm f2.8 and Loxia 35mm f2, both of which I actually detest for the terrible corner quality and terrible coma(in case of the Loxia).

 

I may also add the amazing Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC G2, which is about half the price of the Sony FE70-200mmf2.8GM, and in my experience, the Tamron is the sharper lens(I compared 4 copies of each once at my shop).

 

I will keep my FE85mm f1.8, which is one of the best 85mm primes ever made and I much prefer this to the overpriced oversized GM and my plastic coated cheap looking Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8E lens.

 

I will also keep my Voiktlander 15mm f4.5 and 12mm f5.6.

  

UPDATE5: Many people including myself thought Nikon is dying, if not already dead by now, but in reality Nikon still sells many many more units than Sony and Nikon is now working on new type of sensor design and they may collaborate with Pentax and Olympus to set up a new sensor company. If this plays out well, then Sony will be the loser since they will have no one to sell their so-called Fullframe sensors any more. And as a result their highend camera prices will go up significantly.

And now Sony has just announced they've just decided to spin off their digital-imaging division(Sony DI) and now it is an independent business under Sony corp's supervision, just like their sensor group.....

This means now Sony imaging is not a part of Sony but their subsidiary, and therefore, to Sony device group, the imaging group is just a customer,nothing special, in fact,considering its size of market share in relation to that of Nikon, Sony imaging group is a lower class customer to the device group.

So there is no more reason for Sony device technology to keep the best sensor for in-house use-only. In fact now Sony device tech must compete with the new sensor company Nikon Olympus Ricoh have just established here and some European sensor designers such as CMOSIS, who makes the Leica SL sensor and M sensor.

And do not forget there is always Canon if Sony does not sell anything to Nikon.........Canon will start selling it and there will be Panasonic and Tower Jazz also........so Nikon will not have any problem choosing sensor suppliers any more.

Sony must sell their best sensors to Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax , or Sony will lose them, Sony cannot choose customers any more.

If Sony is smart, it will not compete with Nikon or Olympus in camera market. After all, Nikon is the biggest customer of Sony.....and Sony also buys steppers from Nikon anyway. So Sony is not dominating the sensor market, or controlling Nikon as many armchair experts in many camera fora think..........and the just announced Spun-off of their imaging division makes Sony camera business less trust-worthy........... Sony thinks every business as a short term investment and runs it to make it temporarily profitable and then spins it off.

After that? of course sells it to anyone willing to buy it.........like Sony did with the Vaio PC business, TV business, etc,etc.

That is why no one really trust Sony in the long run, we long term Sony users just use its cameras but always know it is a back-up plan or step-gap solution......

After all no serious camera buyers are as obtuse as many spec-chasers and review sites think they are. No one buys into a big expensive camera system just for an amazing set of features in a body or two...................there are many many more important aspects to a system camera than just a set of great features... I think Sony should try to be an Intel of camera.

 

UPDATE6:I attended a few academic conferences in Osaka, Kobe and Kyoto. And I visited many many very crowded tourists venues there and I have come to realize the death of real camera thing is nothing but extremely exaggerated by those silly clickbait sites. There were many many people still using a REAL ILC camera along with their smartphones.

Then what is the problem I've found there?

Well there were a very few people using so-called mirrorless there , especially the high-end mirrorless cameras like theA7R/A7R2,theA7M2, the X-T2, the X-P2, etc. I saw many m43 cameras even the EM1MK2 and GH5, I also spotted many people with XT20, A6300, etc, but I never spotted any A7R2, A7M2, XT2,etc......even at the most crowded tourist places like Kinkaku-ji temple, Kobe Great earthquake museum, Kiyomizudera temple, etc.

And that makes me worry about the long term future of so-called Mirrorless, if Sony and Fuji actually going under before Nikon?

 

To be honest, there are many many Nikon shooters and of course Canon guys and girls, but no A7 or XT2 guys at all.

 

In my last academic conferences in Tokyo area, I found it the same, and in Bangkok and Korea I did not see any Fuji or Sony high-end mirrorless bodies at all.

And more worrying fact was that there were so many Chinese tourists there with big cameras, but none of them shooting a Sony or a Fuji, that makes me really nervous about the future of Sony.

 

Sony is investing a lot of money very quick into the FE system but the ship seems to be sinking. I think the stupid shill marketing and silly "mirrorless taking over the entire industry "hype generated by Fuji and Sony paid internet sites is not at all working for them , but maybe working against them.

  

The temporal D800 success in the camera forums made Nikon this stupid!

   

  

The original ancient Odaiba island shot from Tokyo Rainbow bridge South route.

 

There were about 74 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

Why Fuji will never become mainstream (updated)

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too for something even cheaper and thus more abuse-able camera probably the old A6000. The A6500, the A6300 are not much better than the ancient A6000......at least in terms of sheer IQ.

Any way, since I recently added Fuji system recently, I would like to just compare the lens line of the Fuji X vs the lens line of the Nikon FX vs the lens lineup of the Sony E mount. Many times I find the excessively hard and nasty lens criticism Sony gets from many reviewers and forum experts are extremely unfair, unfounded and dishonest...... And most of times those extreme critics of Sony lens line have actually never used any of expensive Sony or Zeiss FE primes or do not understand how to test lenses correctly.

So here it goes..........

Is Fuji better for lens selection than Sony or Nikon, or is Fuji at least a cheaper system than a FF system like Sony or Nikon?

Well...yes and no. It is not so simple.

Yes, they have APS-C dedicated fast primes that Sony lacks and their zooms are miles ahead compared to Sony APS-C zooms, but then again, the primes Fuji offers are pretty large and heavy, they lack OS and (esp older versions) have clunky and loud AF motors. And Nikon lenses tend to be much cheaper for the same quality or even a bit better optical performance than Fuji or Sony. However, if I can include FF lenses since I only have FF lenses for my Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would have to say Sony FE and Nikon F are much more complete systems than Fuji X. Plus, Nikon FX has really a lot of cheap thirdparty lenses and other cheap thirdparty accessories with incredibly huge selection of used lens market......

So if the native lens selection and the system performance per dollar is any importance to you , then there is still no mirrorless system better than the Nikon or the Canon system......So it's not all roses and sunshine in Mirrorless camp. I have used Sony system for over a decade and I have collected many lenses for my Sony E and A systems and I have a lot of Nikon lenses as well. Now I have been testing many Fuji lenses and they are indeed very good but not as amazing as many many Fuji fanatics in Fujirumor sites suggest they are, especially with respect to value/performance ratio.

 

Comp 1> 23-25mm FL: Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 vs Fuji 23/1.4 vs Fuji 23/2 vs Nikon 24mm f1.8G AF-S vs Sony SEL24mm f1.8Z.

Here I do not want to but I must admit the Nikon is the best lens especially considering its modest price tag and size. Then I prefer the tiny Fuji 23mm f2 WR for bad environment shooting. But if I have to pick the absolute best lens from this set, then I would have to pick the Batis 25 is a bit sharper lens than the the Fuji 23mm f1.4 or the APS-C dedicated Sony Zeiss. The one serious issue of the Batis 25mm f2 is the extremely pronounced CA in highlight or very high contrasty area, other wise, it is a near perfect lens, and I use it very often on my A7R.

The optical performance of the Fuji 23mm f1.4 is nothing short of amazing too but its mechanical quality is not as great as its optical quality.. The Fuji is very well built on paper and according to the fanboys, and renders OOF area or bokeh very very nicely and of course goes down to 1.4........but the AF is loud and just feels awkward, actually it cannot focus well in extreme lowlight where a really fast prime like it is really needed. It has very nice optical quality though...... the fly-by-wire focus ring is also extremely awkward to use in very dark places. Unlike the excellent Zeiss Batis, the Fuji is not weather-sealed and I doubt it is actually well built, to me it feels very cheap...........

The Sony Zeiss is actually a better lens in terms of build and mechanical quality than the Fuji XF23mm f1.4, very well built and very precise focus system and the AF of the Sony Zeiss is light years ahead of the Fuji XF23mm f1.4.

But again considering the price to performance ratio and pure optical quality and over all real life usability or practicality , the Nikon is the best bargain lens here and I mean by far the best bang for your buck kind of a lens not the absolute best -which, in my opinion, is the Batis 25mm f2.

The Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED is smaller and lighter than the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 lens or the Fuji XF23mm f1.4 lens and the Nikon is a lot cheaper than both the Fuji and Zeiss Batis. The Batis lens is very sharp in the center, but in the edges and corners it is still good but not as sharp as the cheap plastic Nikon f2.8G lens..........the green edged CA is annoying and hard to get rid of in PP, and after getting rid of it in PP, the final output becomes very much softer than without the software correction.

And it has incredibly heavy,pronounced distortion before the extremely heavy handed software correction.......that almost all makers mirrorless cameras apply to all their lenses.

So if MF is fine , I actually prefer my Zeiss 25mm f2 Distagon ZF2 lens for this specific focal length. For AF work, I prefer the Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is an exceptional lens at very very modest affordable price.

Comp 2>At 50-55mm range: Sony FE55mm f1.8Z for Sony E mount vs Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Nikon F vs Fuji 56/1.2 for Fuji X vs Loxia 50mm f2 for Sony E.

Yeah I know, f1.2 vs f1.4 vs f1.8 vs f2 not a very fair optical comparison but still this is the most practical way of comparing the systems since not all of these systems have the same class similar optics with the same max F number...and their respective choice of sensor format is also different...........So the Fuji f1.4 lenses just roughly equal to the Nikon and the Sony f1.8 primes in terms of light gathering power and actual DOF-controllability.

I think most likely people use these systems with AF use these lenses and therefore I would like to compare these. Well the Loxia is pure MF lens but I've thrown it into this mix since it is my personal favorite lens for my E mount body and I use it a lot for video and paid corporate portrait work I sometimes do in the summer season(in the winter I am very busy and I have no time for any kind of part time work).

The Fuji is a very fast f1.2 lens but with very slow AF motor, and again it has the terrible fly-by-wire MF ring, and so does the Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 Z lens. This is very annoying, and this is why I do not like the optically fantastic almost flawless(at least for the price) FE55mm f1.8Z.

The Fuji XF56mm f1.2 has amazing color and micro contrast and almost distortion free even before the usual software correction Fuji applies to any of their lenses, it renders beautiful skin tone with very pleasant bokeh.

Probably the Fuji has better copy to copy variation and tighter QC than Sony on their older fake Zeiss line lenses such as this FE55mm f1.8, the FE35mm f1.4Z, the FE35mm f2.8,though Sony has already improved it with the newer FE 50mm f1.4Z, which is objectively a great lens but I personally dislike for its awkward ergonomics and extreme Lo-CA at wideopen and near wideopen range. The FE55mm f1.8Z has significantly pronounced pincushion distortion but it is automatically corrected in the camera or in ACR or in C1 pro, or in DXO pro, however, that auto lens distortion correction makes the lens significantly softer in the edges and corners than it should have originally been without it. So in final images it usually ends up softer than the Fuji or the big FF Sigma lens on a Nikon body. The Loxia 50mm f2 is a lens designed after the legendary Leica mount Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens and its rendering characteristic is very similar to that of the Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens, but the Sony mount version is significantly sharper in the centers with a lot less lateral CA(still more pronounced green CA than the FE 55 or FE 50mm f1.4 Planar, though). And the Loxia is very good at handling complex contra-light scenes, and so it seldom produces terrible rainbow colored ghost...... , the Loxia is very very tactile and easy to MF precisely for video and for stills even including moderately fast moving things or people. So despite of its slightly slower max speed at f2 , I much prefer it to any of the other around 50mm primes for Sony or Fuji, or any of the Nikon 50mm primes.

However, if I can throw the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus lens into the mix, I prefer it to everything else I've compared here. The new Zeiss for Nikon and Canon mount is simply a superb lens with outstanding MF ring, I can MF it easily at f1.4 and get tack sharp images anytime......it's that good. IMHO, the Milvus 50mm f1.4 is the best 50mm prime ever made out side of the real Leica price territory..........the Leica 50mm f2 APO is slightly better I think but I can no longer afford it , I used to have it for a few months but I sold it to my grandpa(needed the money for my new storage system 70 four tera byte hard drives and 24 one tera byte SSDs, etc). I think the Milvus series is really underrated line of Ziess, it is actually as great as their more famous Otus line without the crazy bulk of the Otus series. I know the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otsus series primes are fantastic optically, but they are too impractical in real life scenes(outside of studio and landscape), and therefore, I am not a fan of them.

I love the Milvus line and the older ZF2 line Zeiss primes more than the new Batis or Loxia line Zeiss primes for Sony ,and I am sometimes thinking about going back to Nikon main for that very reason plus better flash and cheaper more practical lens line-up than the Sony FE or Fuji X.

But if you are simply looking for the best bang for your buck kind of a person, then I think there is nothing really beats the Nikon AF-S50mm f1.4G, which is actually a sharp lens if you shoot it at f2.2 or smaller aperture. And if you are like me tend to stop it down to at least f5.6 or so most of times, then the cheap Nikon 50 mm f1.4G is just as sharp as the expensive Loxia 50mm f2 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or Zony 50mm f1.4 Z. But for me the Milvus and the Loxia are both worth the high prices since they have the best MF ring for the Sony bodies, I really hate the fly-by-wire MF system of Zony or Fuji.

And it is obvious that all current tiny bodied mirrorless systems are overpriced and without the super heavy-handed software correction they can not compete well with the best Zeiss or Sigma primes for Nikon Canon mount system, in fact, the cheap Nikon f1.8G series primes beat many of the expensive Zony, Sony GM , Fuji XF lenses in terms of pure optical and mechanical quality, and it is a shocking fact to many.

I think why you may want to pay high premium for Loxia or Batis line if you shoot Sony FE system is that they seem to have very very high QC tolerances and chances are you may never get a bad copy of it at least an extremely bad one.

 

Comp 3> Sony 24-70mm f2.8GM vs Fuji 16-50mm f2.8 XF, Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD.

No comparison here. Sony should be ashamed with their zooms. Although I had a very good 24-70mm f4 and f2.8GM, they were still way behind what the 16-50mm f2.8, let alone the new Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR......The Sony 24-70mm f4 Z is an OK lens for the modest price and compact size, but the 24-70mm f2.8 GM is a super expensive lens, costing about 300 hundreds more than the Nikon version and still optically not as good as the Nikon, or in fact I believe it is even a bit worse than the Tamron version for Nikon F mount.

In fact, lack of any quality zoom in the bread and butter range for event pros or part time paid photographers in the current Sony lens line up is a big minus point of Sony system regardless of the mirror type...........SLT or mirrorless.

And another issue is no Tamron, Sigma support for Sony E and A mount any more, this is a huge drawback of the system...........to say the least. If there was a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for Sony E mount, I would have bought it and replaced my Nikon mount version of it for my A7R and Nikon D750. It is very pathetic sad that we Sony users are always forced to get the overpriced GM or Batis line lenses even for the focal range where we might want to just get a "good enough" cheap off-brand lens option.

And in fact , in many cases I actually prefer Tamron lenses to Sony or Zeiss E mount lenses even without any discount or like that.

If I had the Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC option for my Sony system, then I wouldn't have bought a few copies of the Batis E 85mm f1.8 OSS and the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM and returned most of these. I simply prefer the Tamron to the Zeiss or Sony regardless of their prices or brand names in this case. The Tamorn 85mm f1.8,35mm f1.8VC, 45mm f1.8 VC, etc, are really great lenses and many times I've considered going back to Nikon main just for these modestly priced but high quality Tamron primes.

 

I think the Sony E16-70mm f4 (recent copies)are quite good, but still no where near the best APS-C zoom Fuji or Nikon makes for their respective APS-C system.........But in this case the Sony lens is at least very versatile and small unlike their FF zooms..........they are pure bogs, especially the 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm f2.8 GM....

 

Comp 4>Sony FE70-200mm f4 OSS, Nikon AF-S70-200mmf4GEDVR, Fuji XF55-200mm f4-5.6ED.

Well, in this comparison, I must say the Sony FE70-200mm f4G, at least the recent copy(made after 2015),is the best in the set. The Sony is cheaper and sharper and comes with tripod collar. The initial 3000 or so copies had the soft 200mm f4 setting issue, but the copies produced after 2015 July are much better, if you read the recent review on the Sony FE70-200mmf4 G at Ephotozine, you see it clearly, it is raved there, and they are usually an anti-Sony, pro Nikon site.

In Japan, the Sony FE70-200mm f4 G SSM lens is one of the biggest bargain lenses, and now Sony is giving a free Zeiss branded Protection filter for any one buys this lens.

So for me, in this range it is a no brainer. It is relatively compact, sharp throughout the range, with very well corrected almost flat field at most of focal range, it is a very very good zoom at very very reasonable price point.

The Nikon AF-S70-200mm f4G ED VR lens was a good lens when it was out. But now it seems really dated and overpriced. It is heavier than the Sony by about 205g, it is a bit longer than the Sony and much bigger and heavier than the relatively small(albeit darker)Fuji. The Nikon is less sharp at 70mm mark than the Sony at all aperture settings, with a bit more pronounced barrel distortion than that of the Sony. At 135mm setting, the Sony is still a bit sharper and better corrected. At 200mm f4, the Nikon might still be a bit sharper at 200mm f4 setting but not by much, the later recently released copies of the Sony is much better than the initially released copies that tested by most of so-called review sites, so you may see it seems much worse than it actually is at 200mm f4 setting at most of review sites, but it has really improved since 2015.

Compared to the cheap but dark Fuji zoom, the Fuji is overrated lens, obviously.

It is not the same class of the zoom as either the Nikon or the Sony 70-200mm f4 zoom. Claiming the XF55-200 dim zoom as good as the Sony FE 70-200mm f4 G is a bit of stretch. IMHO, the Fuji 55-200 is a bit fancier version of a typical kit zoom, that is all about it.

 

Comp 5> around 50mm macro lens: Sony FE 50mm f2.8 macro, Nikon AF-S60mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, Fuji 60mm f1.2 almost macro lens, Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG.

Well there is no need any serious analysis or reading at all about these lenses, I used to have all of these and I only kept the Sony.

The Sony FE 50mm f2.8 Macro is a fantastic lens especially for the modest price tag it carries. After all, it is the third very sharpest prime ever tested on the a7R2 and a7R.

It beats the about 100 US more expensive Nikon 60 G micro hands down, albeit the compromised slow AF, but in macro range no one use AF anyway.

For pure optical quality it is a absolute steal, it has very low CA, thanks to the amazing new ED element, it has very very low distortion, and it produces cool color(not as warm as Zeiss or G branded Sony lenses) and I prefer that personally, but many people especially those who love flowers or people head shots may prefer a bit warmer OOC color.

The Fuji 60mm f2.4 is an excellent lens too but it is not a REAL macro, it is only a half macro kind like the Canon EF24-70mm f4 L IS in macro mode.

So if you need the real macro capability in mirrorless system there is no other choice than the Sony or you must go down to m43 league, and I say go down but as for macro m43 system is not actually worse than FF or especially APS-C system unless you have super expensive macro lens plus macro ring flash and always 100 percent use a tripod.

The m43 allows you to focus stack automatically for better DOF, and it has excellent but reasonably priced compact macro lens choices such as the amazing Olympus 60mm f2.8, the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Leica branded lens, the Olympus and Panasonic 30mm f2.8 macro. And Panasonic will release long awaited X120mm f2.8 G macro lens very soon.

So for me and I think many casual macro shooters the m43 is the most interesting choice for macro work or just simple casual floower close up.

I love Sony 30mm f3.5 on my A6500 too, it is a cheap lens but very practical, you can really abuse it in rain, in cold mountains, etc, and it never breaks. Even if it breaks, hey who cares? it is very cheap indeed. But if you like shooting food or some product like some Star Wars figures or Mickey Mouse doll like I do, then the Sony FE50mm f2.8 macro is an excellent choice especially on the R bodies.

The cheap Sony macro is a bit less sharp than the amazingly sharp FE55mm f1.8Z on the A7R2, but it is just as sharp as the Sonnar on the A7R or the a7M2. And in my test comfortably beats the Loxia 50mm f2 in the center and especially in the edges, albeit a bit more pronounced Lo-CA in highlight or OOF area. In any case, the Sony FE50mm f2.8 is a real bargain deal lens in the current FE system, and this lens and the FE90mm f2.8G prove that actually there are many bargain deal lenses in the current harshly criticized as expensive or overpriced(mostly by non-Sony users) Sony lens system.

Comp 6> around 100mm macro lens: Sony FE90mm f2.8G, Tamron 90 mm f2.8 VC G2, Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, etc.

Well there is really no comp here, the Sony FE 90mm wins hands down as DXO and others all confirm it firmly. I had all of these plus the famous Voiklander 125mm f2.5 APO macro, and the FE 90mm f2.8 G is the absolute winner here, of course the Voiktlander is also a great lens but it is not as practical as the Sony in real life use.

The Sony lens also beats both the Zeiss 100 mm f2 ZF2 and the Milvus version in resolution, CA, distortion, and light fall off, so it is an outstanding lens without any doubt.

The lens really shines on the a7R2, but it is really good on any body but if your sensor is just 24mp FF , then it easily outresolves the low resolution sensor. It actually even outresolves the 42mp sensor. It is that good with respect to sheer resolution and measurable so-called objective IQ.

However, it is not really easy to use in real life since it is big and not balances well on any of Sony A7X body, let alone on any of A6XXX body. I think Sony really needs a bit bigger body for this type of truly outstanding optics that're clearly designed to resolve the next generation high resolution FF. Many internet review sites talk about the latest sensors out-resolving the lenses very often as the biggest issue of the high resolution FF camera system, but it is a big myth or even lie, it is better to have a sensor easily out-resolves any lens you can put on it because it really eliminates all sorts of bad sensor artifacts issues.

 

Body wise, I can only repeat what I said before. The last APS-C body I personally bought with my own money was the Sony A6500 and it feels good in my hands and it has great quality RAW file but terrible jpg's just like all the other Sony cameras. The shutter sounds very cheap with helplessly bad shutter shock, the rolling shutter in Electronic shutter mode is very bad and it gets even worse in video mode. But I never have the infamous heat issue with my A6500 in stills mode, just in video mode. My A6300 has terrible heat issue both in stills and in motion modes. I do not really have any issue with Sony menu system any more but I am already extremely used to it by using almost every single Sony AXXX and A7X camera........the short battery life issue is already solved since I have special USB charger for my mirrorless cameras and I have already collected 12 Sony batteries since the first NEX5. And to be fair to Sony, no other company mirrorless system has better battery life than these Sony cameras. So over all despite of the flawed mount design and questionable mechanical quality with terribly slow general operation speed of these cameras, I think Sony E mount system seems like still the best cost effective choice in the current mirrorless world with respect to simple body usability aspect of camera system, especially if you do not mind using fullframe lenses on an APS-C body.

The X-T2 is built like a tank but quite a bit heavier in the hand than the A6300 but not much heavier than the new A6500, which I also own and think also built like a tank.

The A7R2 is even heavier than the Fuji, albeit the lower quality body material used and poor body sealing quality. The Fuji is a much faster camera in the real world use, it shoots much faster than the A6300, the A7R2 or the A7M2 but the A6500 is even faster than the XT2 with a much longer lasting big buffer. However, the A6500 does not have any sort of external grip option that might have helped the balance of the system when a long tele photo lens is mounted on the camera, so the real life usability of the Fuji with a big AF lens is better than that of the A6500. The A6500 and the A6300 have very fast single shot AF and decent C AF in good light, so they should have had an external grip option for better balance with a big tele photo lens for action shooting.

The eye-detect AF and faceAF on the Fuji is just OK compared to the Sony's, but it is the only one aspect of AF performance where the Sony APS-C beats the Fuji XT2 or X-Pro2. But I am sure none of the current APS-C and FF mirrorless are as good as the upcoming GH5(that I've already pre-ordered and consider as a game-changer) with respect to AF performance and in general operation speed.

The Panasonic has the best AF in mirrorless world but even that is not even close to the decent Canon or Nikon D-SLR for action tracking. The D500 still blows anything from Sony, Fuji, Olympus out of the water and the AF performance gap in real lowlight between the best mirrorless and the mid level D-SLRs such as the D7200 and 80D is not getting smaller but bigger, IMHO, especially when a big telephoto lens is mounted on them. Mirrorless lowlight AF is actually not getting any better except with Panasonic system, this is a real shame. But all other areas of AF performance the Panasonic GH5 and the G85 are both better than any D-SLR, period. These two Panaosnics can focus down to minus 4EV without any issue, any D-SLR or other brand mirrorless cameras cannot even touch it with respect to extreme lowlight AF accuracy......The Sony A7MK2 on paper can focus down to the same level of lowlight minus 4EV, but in real life the Panasonic is a lot better in these extreme lowlight scenes.

The Jpeg quality of the Fuji is quite amazing and sometimes saves a lot of time, so I kind of appreciate that. But the Fuji XT2 or XP2, or even much cheaper new XT20 still have the infamous dust issue as with the Sony A7X and A6XXX........and this is the real reason I can never shoot my Sony or Fuji in Jpeg mode, I always need to remove about 46 dustspots in the sky whenever I use my XT2, A6300, A7M2, A7R2, or A6500, they really have severe dust issue and the worst of all the sensor of the A6500, the A7R2 and the A7M2 is very very difficult to clean safely without sending them in for Sony service center. The sensor of the Fuji's and the older Sony are at least much easier to clean without damaging the sensor or IBIS. I think the really effective automatic dust reduction system of the m43 is really underrated, and it is, I consider, one of these most effective real life weapons of the m43 system that Olympus and Panasonic might be able to effectively use against the others in their marketing or educational materials.

This is the main reason why I sold my A7X2 series cameras and kept my A6300/A6500 and A7R.

As for Fuji UI and controls initially I liked it and I was finding my way around the camera very easily and the Q menu of the Fuji system much easier and more logical to use than any Sony menu system, there is no comparison in this department and I think Sony should focus on this area and also the over all usability with increased operation speed of the camera "system". However, I quickly found out the amazing controls and UI of Fuji that all Fuji fanatics in Fuji rumor sites rave about is kind of working against me or many non retro prime shooters around me. I really hate the retro style bodies and controls inherited or borrowed from film era "my granpa generation", who was one of those anti-Vietnam war hipsters wearing crazy bell bottom jeans and flare shirts.

For me the film era UI and controls are very very difficult to use and very much stressful on my peace of mind. When I was shooting the XT2 there were times I literally felt wanting to throw it onto my grandpa's concrete car garage.....using it for a long period of time every day was that frustrating.

 

I think both the Fuji and the Sony system have serious lens issues; there is no thirdparty lens support other than obscure manual prime options from cheap obscure names. Zeiss makes a great set of primes for Sony and a couple for Fuji, but they are all primes.....

I think they need more great zooms than primes to become true rivals to Canon and Nikon system for really budget minded average camera buyers. I think they really need to persuade Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang to re-enter into the system.

Lack of any decent quality zoom in the so-called bread and butter focal range for the Sony or the Fuji mount system is a huge issue for many. There are no decent quality zooms in 100-400 range or 24-70mm FF equivalent range...........even if you accept to pay 2k for each zoom range. And in case of Sony, their 70-200mm f2.8GM OSS is a expensive but horrible lens with really bad quality control and copy to copy variation to date...

I have tested three copies of that lens and all of these 3 were terribly de-centered.

They all have terrible anti-flare coating and they all produced terrible green or magenta/ orange rainbow colored ghost and spot flare......and the distortion at the 70mm mark on this lens was simply monstorus, very very difficult to correct in PP. At the 200mm mark on this lens it gets even worse, the pinchusioning type of distortion at the 200mm mark on this lens is even harder to correct than the barrel type distortion at the 70mm mark.

If you are a pure prime shooter, then you might love the current great FE prime lineup and XF prime lineup, but for a mostly zoom shooter or for a documentary type of work that really requires a great mid range zoom, the Sony E system and the Fuji X system are both not great. Especially not great for those events where you do not want to change lenses over and over due to the dust issue or due to your shooting objects move fast, or you cannot simply zoom with your feet.

So while I think the Sony and the Fuji systems are really good for studio or landscape or location work where you can safely change lenses all the time and allowed to work on a tripod at very slow pace. But for any thing requires speed or a set of great 24-70 or 70-200 and 100-400 kind of zooms , they are just a pure joke, simply useless systems.

And for that type of works the DSLRs are much cheaper and much more trusted tools due to the much faster general operation speed, much better zoom lineup, much better third party lens support, much more reliable flash system,etc.

All that said both the Fuji and the Sony system are already very good for most of normal use cases and getting better and better every iteration, so I am quite positive about their short term future success.....but not very sure in the longer run............especially considering the fact Nikon and Canon will get more serious about their mirrorless offerings very soon.

And in case of Canon they are already no2 in mirrorless market only second to Olympus in total unit sales, and only second to Sony in market share by value.

I think if the Sony FE system and Fuji X system will not sell very well, or will not better the all Canon Nikon D-SLRs in unit based market share, no thirdparty will make a great set of zooms or any decent moderately fast primes at reasonable prices, and this extreme focus on highend market of Fuji and Sony may eventually hurt them seriously.

In order to get more NEW users coming into their systems they really need attractive lowend bodies like improved more rugged version of their X-A3 or A5100. In case of Fuji the cheap but very capable X-T20 may rectify this issue, but still they have very expensive (for those potential consumer body buyers)lens line issue and that must be fixed or they will slowly lose the momentum they've got since the XT2.

Personally, if I have to choose all from scratch again, then I would still choose the Sony system as my main system and maybe m43 to back it up for documentary work done while I am traveling. IMHO, the Olympus EM1MK2 or the Panasonic GH5 or the G85 based m43 system is much better than the Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 based system, at least much more practical with more stabilized lenses and much better flash capability.

So the m43 for action travel and video, the Sony FE for serious tripod work is still the logical choice for me.

 

I think Nikon is the best value system for most of things still, but I just cannot go back to D-SLR main, I feel it really odd whenever I look into the OVF of my D750. It feels really anachronistic and I do not like it at all, I always try hard to like it, though.

I really think Nikon needs a serious mirrorless system that fully utilizes all the current great Nikon F mount lenses at very least the E series lenses, or they will slowly falling into the irrelevant category.

After having owned about 22 Sony cameras in last 11 years or so, I have come to realize I can never fully trust Sony in the long run, and always looking for something else to move to or simply better value system, but I cannot find anything better than my current E mount set up just yet. But the continuously pushing the user base to their higher end products by incessantly replacing or discontinuing products that they do think not high-end enough or highly profitable enough for them eventually hurts them because this strategy will eventually exhaust many of their long time faithful users and at the same time it will scare potential new users away.

  

UPDATE: I interviewed many NORMAL camera buyers in my area at our camera shop and asked them to tell us about what was the main reason they did not buy so-called mirrorless any more, and why they think the market share of these mirrorless decreasing at least in the Western world and the already developed part of Asia such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea , Singapore and HK.

They answered to these questions carefully as we paid some $$ and I think we found out a few interesting things about the NORMAL camera buyers' perception/opinion about ILC cameras and the culture surrounding the camera business:

 

1 to them, if it requires a bag even a tiny one, it's really not important what kind of camera system it is; a mirrorless or a D-SLR, a m43 or a FF, it is just too big and simply too annoying to carry around. So they use their cellphone more even though many of them already have some sort of One cameras or cheap ILCs.

2 To most of NORMAL camera buying people here it really does not matter FF or m43 or APS-C or MF because they are all too difficult to operate and actually really not much different to each other in real life use(at least to them).

This means maybe the small sensor camera systems like the m43 and the Nikon One will all fail since there is no market for them. Not many average camera buyers are interested in ILC systems but fixed lens all around cameras with good one button wireless connection to their phones. And not many the fanatics get interested in these cause most of them are obsessed with the best IQ possible they can get out of a camera system. Thus Olympus, Nikon and Panasonic will definitely need a bigger sensor system to entice them.

3 they do not want a lens like Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art even if it is selling for $50 or less. In fact, any kind of lens interchangeability is not important to them, in fact it is really annoying, and if it is an all around just fixed lens camera like the Sony RX10MK3 , it is actually a better camera system than any type of ILC with a set of primes that most of camera forum denizens want. They should realize they are not the majority of camera buyers and making and selling exactly what they want does not actually help any of these camera makers........

To them a set of great dedicated APS-C primes may be an important part of a good camera system, but to most of NORMAL people it is just not an important or an alluring feature at all.

So as opposed to what Tony , Thom, and many other self-proclaimed experts in many camera forums think, a great set of APS-C dedicated primes will NOT help Nikon or Sony. In fact, outside of the forums most of people actually prefer ZOOMS.

4 To NORMAL people all interchangeable lens cameras are big and quite intimidating.

This means that the very common camera forum trend to get mirrorless for being less conspicuous in the public reason is a silly idea , no one actually cares about if it is a mirroless or a D-SLR, to them all interchangeable lens cameras are annoying and intimidating to most of non-photographers.......so if they really want to be less conspicuous they should try one of the One inch sensor fixed lens cameras.

 

So as I already pointed out, the camera makers should focus on developing fixed multi lenses multi sensored computational cameras with easy one-button wireless connectivity to the phones. The software must be intuitive and 21st century design rather than the current 1980 design, I think it should be user programmable and as Thom points out open the source code to the smart kids and then some of them will develop some good apps for them for free.

Remember why the 5DMK2 and the Panasonic GH2 became such huge hits? Because of the hacked firmwares, I think it is the key.

  

UPDATE2:The last two weeks or so, I have been testing my Batis 85mm f1.8 (I have 2 copies of it and I have access to 6 extra copies of it at my shop) vs the new Sony FE85mm f1.8.

And surprisingly enough I found the Sony cheap lens actually quite a bit sharper at f1.8 and probably throughout all f stops.

The bokeh or out of focus area rendition of the Batis seems to be a bit smoother, it has a bit less lateral CA, but it seems to be softer, actually obviously so. It is not a copy issue since I have also tested 6 extra Batis we have at our store.

Another big con of the Batis vs the Sony FE 85mm f1.8 is that the Batis has noticeably more pincushion distortion , if you turn off the in camera lens correction, you will see it in the EVF of any Sony A7X camera.

The color tone is also different, the Batis produces a bit warmer color than the Sony and many say they prefer the look of Zeiss, but honestly if you objectively blind test it you will soon realize the Sony renders everything more naturally with a bit more neutral tone. Many Zeiss fanboys just say it is a Zeiss, so it is a special lens, well really? Not all Zeiss lenses are great, only a very few Zeiss are actually great, and these days everything is designed with computer with using the same software, so every lens in the same size range is actually identically sharp, no dramatic difference there, really..

The Tamron 85mm f1.8VC, the Batis 85mm f1.8E, the Sony FE85mm f1.8, are all similarly sharp wide open, and from f2.8 the Sony is noticeably better than the Batis and the Tamron.

I also prefer the cooler out of the camera color of the Sony lens over the Tamron and the Zeiss Batis.

Now, we all know that Zeiss is not a better lens designer than Sony or Tamron , or any one..........maybe this fact is really hard for the fanboys to admit, but it is the reality.

IMHO, the only one minor drawback of the new Sony FE85mm f1.8 is the a bit harsh out of focus area rendition in strong back lit scene, and I think almost all Sony FE lenses share this issue.

The AF of the FE85mm f1.8 is much faster than the AF of the Batis 85mm f1.8E, so for shooting my cats indoor, I think the Sony is a much better lens. For weddings, I think the Batis may be a bit better since it renders our of focus area a bit smoother in extreme back lit scene. However, I do not like the warmer color signature of the Batis and many Japanese Zeiss lenses. I suspect the actual lens designer for the Batis series is Tamron, and therefore they share very similar look to the Tamron 85mm f1.8VC. I may be wrong here but I think I am right since the look Batis series lenses share is quite different from my MF Zeiss lenses including my Loxia lenses and ZF ZE lenses.

It is sad but I have to admit that almost all Zeiss Batis and Loxia lenses are just ok , nothing really special about these, except the 25mm, which is my favorite lens, and Loxia 21mm f2.8 and may be also the 50mm f2 Loxia.

The 18mm f3.5 Batis is a poorly designed lens, really should not carry the Zeiss blue badge. The Batis 85mm f1.8E was a great lens, at least I thought so until I compared it to the new cheap Sony 85mm f1.8, but now it is the softest 85mm in the current Sony E mount lens line up. The FE85mm f1.8, the Tamorn 85mm f1.8VC, the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art, the Sony 85mm f1.4GM are all sharper than the overpriced plastic coated bulky Batis 85m f1.8.

I am selling the Batis and get the Sony FE50mm f1.4 soon to replace my Loxia 50mm f2 and Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8.

 

But the most important change that this very humble Sony FE85mm f1.8 has induced in this industry is that it has kind of killed all charms of them43 system and the Fuji X.

The Fuji 56 f1.2 and the m43 fake Leica 42.5 mm f1.2 lens are great optically, but as a whole system, they are a much less capable system than a cheap Sony lens on a FF body.

  

UPDATE3: Recently, I decided to sell some of my Sony, Nikon, and Fuji gear and the results were really surprising.

 

I sold a couple of Fuji X-T2, a Sony A6500, a A6300, a A7R, a A7R2, three A7MK2. I also sold my Nikon D800E, D750, and D810.

 

The most expensive camera by far of the list was the A7R2, but surprisingly I got about identical amount of money for it to what I got for my much cheaper(as a brand new) D810. I paid about 3200 USD for my A7R2 in 2015 and shockingly it was devalued a lot more than I thought, I could only get about 1750 USD for it.

I must say it was a terrible loss.

I paid around 2000 US for my D810 in 2016, and got back about 1800 US for it in May 2017.

 

I got about 123000 yen for my X-T2, and I must say the resell value of this camera is great, I think Fuji has been controlling the price of this camera quite well. I just lost about 5000 yen on this camera and I have used it for more than 7 months, so it was a great deal. Renting it over 5 months and paid only 45 US or less, is an amazing deal.

 

I got offered only 72000 for my A7R and it was really pity, so I did not sell it.

 

I got only 64000 yen for my A6300, but I expected this so it was not really shocking, still it was a bad value camera, though. But it was replaced by the A6500, so I did not expect too much for this one.......

 

I got about 75000 yen for my A6500 and it was quite shocking, I expected to get more for that since I paid 118000 yen for it in last Oct.

 

I got 95000 yen for my A7MK2, it was quite sad, deplorable since it is a FF and cheaper than the X-T2 in the used camera market here.

I got about 134000 yen for my 2 year old D750, and it was a positive surprise. I did not expect to get this much of money for it since I paid only about 158000 yen for it in 2014.

 

So I realized Sony cameras seem to hold the worst resell value (by far) in Japan and my Thai friend told me in Thailand too.

I was about to sell my second A7R2, but I decided to keep it just for my FE16-35mm f4 and Voiklander 15mm f4.5 and Sony 85mm f1.8...

 

But the shocking loss by far this time was the Batis 85mm f1.8 or the Batis 18mm f2.8, I have lost a lot of money on those 2 lenses, and I did not expect this.....I thought I might get about 900 US for my Batis 85, but I got only about 630 US for it.

The 18mm Batis was even worse, I paid about 168000 yen for it in 2016..... and now I could get only about 98000 yen for it, it was the most shocking and the biggest loss by far, I never thought the resale value of the Batis 18mm f2.8 this bad.

  

So now I decided never buy any more Batis series lenses, I have lost too much on this terribly built so-called Zeiss(actually Tamron made) lenses.

  

UPDATE4: I am now in the process of replacing all my Sony E mount lenses(except a few) with Canon EF mount lenses.

I hated adapters, but after I tried the Sigma MC11, I changed my mind and I think it is much safer to use my Sony bodies with Canon lenses since Canon EF mount is the safest long term future proven mount, and the resell value of the super expensive Sony GM and so-called Sony Zeiss are too bad, the Batis line is even worse. So I think by selling off all expensive Sony E mount lenses that cannot be reused in any other mount system in the near future, I will be more secured and adding the Sigma adapter expand the possible AF lens selection for my FE bodies. After all, I realized that Sony FE zooms are all mediocre , even the most expensive GM ones.

 

I will replace my FE16-35mm f4 Z with a Canon EF16-35mm f4 L IS, I have compared ten copies of each and I am 100 percent sure the Canon is the better lens and cheaper one. In fact, the adapter plus the lens price is the same as the Sony FE16-35mm f4 Z alone. And another benefit of this lens over the FE16-35mm f4 Z is that the Canon lens does not extend its length when it zooms out or in.

 

I will also replace the FE24-70mm f4 with the EF24-70mm f4 LIS.

I will get the 40mm f2.8 STM, which is a surprisingly good lens for the modest size and price.

 

I will also add Sigma 135mm f1.8 Art, which is the sharpest lens ever produced by any one according to Photozone,de.

 

I also add Canon EF70-300mm f4-5.6IS MK2 lens, which is really cheap and for me it is a worth lens since I am not a serious telephoto shooter and so I do not want to invest over 100000 yen for a lens like FE70-300mm f4-5.6G, which is clearly overpriced.

 

I also add Tamron 35mm f1.8VC to replace my Sony FE 35mm f2.8 and Loxia 35mm f2, both of which I actually detest for the terrible corner quality and terrible coma(in case of the Loxia).

 

I may also add the amazing Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC G2, which is about half the price of the Sony FE70-200mmf2.8GM, and in my experience, the Tamron is the sharper lens(I compared 4 copies of each once at my shop).

 

I will keep my FE85mm f1.8, which is one of the best 85mm primes ever made and I much prefer this to the overpriced oversized GM and my plastic coated cheap looking Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8E lens.

 

I will also keep my Voiktlander 15mm f4.5 and 12mm f5.6.

  

UPDATE5: Many people including myself thought Nikon is dying, if not already dead by now, but in reality Nikon still sells many many more units than Sony and Nikon is now working on new type of sensor design and they may collaborate with Pentax and Olympus to set up a new sensor company. If this plays out well, then Sony will be the loser since they will have no one to sell their so-called Fullframe sensors any more. And as a result their highend camera prices will go up significantly.

And now Sony has just announced they've just decided to spin off their digital-imaging division(Sony DI) and now it is an independent business under Sony corp's supervision, just like their sensor group.....

This means now Sony imaging is not a part of Sony but their subsidiary, and therefore, to Sony device group, the imaging group is just a customer,nothing special, in fact,considering its size of market share in relation to that of Nikon, Sony imaging group is a lower class customer to the device group.

So there is no more reason for Sony device technology to keep the best sensor for in-house use-only. In fact now Sony device tech must compete with the new sensor company Nikon Olympus Ricoh have just established here and some European sensor designers such as CMOSIS, who makes the Leica SL sensor and M sensor.

And do not forget there is always Canon if Sony does not sell anything to Nikon.........Canon will start selling it and there will be Panasonic and Tower Jazz also........so Nikon will not have any problem choosing sensor suppliers any more.

Sony must sell their best sensors to Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax , or Sony will lose them, Sony cannot choose customers any more.

If Sony is smart, it will not compete with Nikon or Olympus in camera market. After all, Nikon is the biggest customer of Sony.....and Sony also buys steppers from Nikon anyway. So Sony is not dominating the sensor market, or controlling Nikon as many armchair experts in many camera fora think..........and the just announced Spun-off of their imaging division makes Sony camera business less trust-worthy........... Sony thinks every business as a short term investment and runs it to make it temporarily profitable and then spins it off.

After that? of course sells it to anyone willing to buy it.........like Sony did with the Vaio PC business, TV business, etc,etc.

That is why no one really trust Sony in the long run, we long term Sony users just use its cameras but always know it is a back-up plan or step-gap solution......

After all no serious camera buyers are as obtuse as many spec-chasers and review sites think they are. No one buys into a big expensive camera system just for an amazing set of features in a body or two...................there are many many more important aspects to a system camera than just a set of great features... I think Sony should try to be an Intel of camera.

 

UPDATE6:I attended a few academic conferences in Osaka, Kobe and Kyoto. And I visited many many very crowded tourists venues there and I have come to realize the death of real camera thing is nothing but extremely exaggerated by those silly clickbait sites. There were many many people still using a REAL ILC camera along with their smartphones.

Then what is the problem I've found there?

Well there were a very few people using so-called mirrorless there , especially the high-end mirrorless cameras like theA7R/A7R2,theA7M2, the X-T2, the X-P2, etc. I saw many m43 cameras even the EM1MK2 and GH5, I also spotted many people with XT20, A6300, etc, but I never spotted any A7R2, A7M2, XT2,etc......even at the most crowded tourist places like Kinkaku-ji temple, Kobe Great earthquake museum, Kiyomizudera temple, etc.

And that makes me worry about the long term future of so-called Mirrorless, if Sony and Fuji actually going under before Nikon?

 

To be honest, there are many many Nikon shooters and of course Canon guys and girls, but no A7 or XT2 guys at all.

 

In my last academic conferences in Tokyo area, I found it the same, and in Bangkok and Korea I did not see any Fuji or Sony high-end mirrorless bodies at all.

And more worrying fact was that there were so many Chinese tourists there with big cameras, but none of them shooting a Sony or a Fuji, that makes me really nervous about the future of Sony.

 

Sony is investing a lot of money very quick into the FE system but the ship seems to be sinking. I think the stupid shill marketing and silly "mirrorless taking over the entire industry "hype generated by Fuji and Sony paid internet sites is not at all working for them , but maybe working against them.

  

The temporal D800 success in the camera forums made Nikon this stupid!

   

# www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqWeOmICIdQ&feature=related

  

Albert Owen designated second home in London and claimed monthly mortgage interest of £1,288 in August 2007. Claimed £629 for television, £73 for painting and decorating and £89 for cutlery

 

James Paice claims mortgage interest on south London flat. Spent £2,684 on furniture in May 2004 and in March 2007, spent another £2,130

 

Ian Paisley claims rent on second home in west London. December 2003, claimed for night at Jolly Hotel St Ermin’s in the city, including £3 on minibar

 

Nick Palmer rents second home in London. Switched between rental properties, claiming £424 in August 2005 for removal costs. Later switched back to rental flat in the original block

 

Owen Paterson claimed mortgage interest of £1,041 a month on flat near Parliament. Switched to another property in 2005, payments rose to £1,657

 

Ian Pearson has second home in West Midlands, claims mortgage interest. Other claims: £240 for 20 hours of gardening

 

Andrew Pelling does not claim additional costs allowance (ACA). Claimed the smaller London Supplement, which was £2,812 last year

 

Mike Penning , a shadow health minister, charged the taxpayer £2.99 for a stainless steel dog bowl

 

John Penrose's second home is Thames-side flat near Parliament, with tracker mortgage, on which he claims monthly interest payments of around £2,000

 

Eric Pickles claimed for £200 in petty cash monthly between 2005 and the middle of 2008. Claimed mortgage interest of less than £250 a month and service charges of £750 a year for a flat in east London. One of the lower claimers. Stopped using the additional costs allowance to run a second home when made party chairman.

 

James Plaskitt asked by fees office not to claim nominal sums such as £400 or £300 a month for groceries without submitting evidence of expenditure

 

Greg Pope claimed £1,590 for shopping at John Lewis in March 2006. In September 2006, submitted claim of £560 for two paintings, for which a receipt with no company letterhead was submitted

 

Stephen Pound is not eligible for second home allowance. Claimed £160 for guided tour of Palace of Westminster under Incidental Expenses Provision (IEP)

 

Bridget Prentice claimed no ACA. Office IEP expenses include £230 in 2004 for accountant to prepare her tax return

 

Gordon Prentice claimed £2,262 for items bought at John Lewis, including a £749 television, £649 fridge freezer and various furniture for London flat on top of £900-a-month mortgage

 

John Prescott claimed for two lavatory seats in two years

 

Adam Price claimed for books, including Bring Home the Revolution: The Case for a British Republic, by Jonathan Freedland. Queried by fees office

 

Dawn Primarolo claimed on second home in Bristol. In 2004, switched to London flat and claimed mortgage interest payments

 

Mark Prisk accidentally claimed £1,726 rather than £1,182 for one month’s mortgage interest on London home. Error was spotted by officials

 

Mark Pritchard moved flats in Westminster in 2007, claiming for £199 vacuum cleaner, £1,000 furnishings, kitchen utensils worth £66, bedding of £45 and a £145 microwave

 

Gwyn Prosser paid his brother from his taxpayer-funded expenses to carry out work on his London flat - despite the fact that he lived almost 200 miles away.

 

John Pugh rents London flat for £1,280 a month; rent claims rose to £1,500. In July 2006, told fees office his daughter would be staying while at university, so he would reduce claims on rent and utilities. Claims remained close to maximum

 

Ken Purchase spent £1,465 on new blinds for second home in south London in 2005-06. Regularly claims up to maximum £400 a month for food. Monthly mortgage interest payments were £580 last year, leaving an ACA of £14,713

 

James Purnell avoided paying capital gains tax on the sale of his London flat after claiming expenses for accountancy advice. Bought expensive gadgets. Spent taxpayers’ money advertising at football and rugby league matches

 

Bill Rammell claimed £475 a month mortgage interest in 2008 for second home located in constituency. Claimed £1,360 for replastering and installing downlights in bedroom

 

Nick Raynsford: as an inner London MP, he is not eligible to claim a second home allowance, but he claimed the maximum London Supplement of £2,812 last year

 

John Redwood has admitted being paid twice after submitting an identical £3,000 decorating bill on his second home allowance

 

Andy Reed has a flat as second home in Westminster. In 2007, claimed £1,180 for the flat but this fell to £727 for a mortgage interest payment in 2008. Website states he claims about £450 aper month in mortgage interest payments

 

Jamie Reed claimed £8,640 stamp duty and £3,943 in legal fees when he bought London home in May 2006. Claimed £2,336 for two beds and two mattresses, but this was reduced to £1,000 by the fees office

 

Alan Reid claimed more than £1,500 on his parliamentary expenses for staying in hotels and bed-and-breakfasts near his home

 

John Reid used his allowance to pay for slotted spoons, an ironing board and a glittery loo seat

 

Willie Rennie's second home is a flat in Lambeth, south London. In 2005, claimed £708 for new cooker and fridge freezer. In 2007, claimed for £1,350 monthly rent

 

Sir Malcolm Rifkind claimed the smaller London Supplement, which amounted to £2,812 last year

 

Linda Riordan bought flat in Kennington in early 2006, claims for mortgage interest. Claims for beds/headboards refused, but £219 bedding, £1,310 sofa bed/chair and £1,936 carpet approved. Regularly claims maximum £400 for unreceipted monthly food bills

 

Andrew Robathan claimed monthly mortgage interest payments on London home of more than £3,300 before notifying the fees office he was switching his second home to a new property in his constituency, “which we are going to refurbish”

 

Angus Robertson successfully appealed to the fees office when they turned down his claim for a £400 home cinema system

 

Hugh Robertson rents second home in London for more than £1,800 a month. Main home, in Kent, belongs to his wife’s family. He checked with fees office that this arrangement was in order, they confirmed it was

 

John Robertson rents a second home in London for about £1,100 a month and has claimed £675 in window cleaning at the property since 2005

 

Laurence Robertson designates constituency house as second home, claiming £900 monthly mortgage interest and about £800 a year heating oil. Pays wife Susan’s travel and phone from office allowance. She works for him but they are separated

 

Geoffrey Robinson has not made any claims on his second home allowance since 2004/05

 

Peter and Iris Robinson both claimed expenses based on the same £1,223 bill when they submitted their parliamentary claims in 2007

 

Dan Rogerson bought London flat in 2005. Claimed £2,500 stamp duty, £1,572 legal fees, £340 survey; £1,108 furniture. In March 2008, changed mortgage to interest-only, allowing maximum benefits of ACA

 

Terry Rooney claimed interest payments on mortgage for home in Bradford using second home allowance. Between March 2007 and April 2008, claimed £1,200 for cleaning

 

Andrew Rosindell claimed more than £125,000 in second home expenses for a flat in London, while designating his childhood home 17 miles away - where his mother lived - as his main address

 

Paul Rowen claimed mortgage interest payments for second home in Battersea, south London. In 2007, claimed for a £325 rug, a chest of drawers costing £295 and an £85 bedside table, all from John Lewis

 

Frank Roy claimed £455 on “assorted bedding, curtains and furnishings” in March 2006. In July, submitted bill for £750 towards £795 HD-ready 32 in television with DVD player. In January 2008, claimed £265 for sink waste disposal unit

 

Chris Ruane claimed £4,560 part costs of buying flat in March 2006, then claimed £10,958 for remainder following month. Fees office noted on claim that this could not be paid because costs were incurred in 2005-06 financial year and it was then 2006-07

 

Joan Ruddock claimed £235 for training on debt advice provided by Shelter, the charity, in May 2008. Confirmed she paid tax on reimbursed accountacy fees

 

David Ruffley claimed for new furniture and fittings after “flipping” his second home from London to a new flat in his constituency

 

Bob Russell claims mortgage interest for south London flat he shares with fellow MP Mike Hancock. In July 2006, claimed £1,035 for replacing windows

 

Christine Russell claims rent on second home in London, which she shares with fellow MP Helen Southworth

 

Joan Ryan spent thousands of pounds on repairs and decorations at her constituency home before switching her designated second home to a London property

 

Alex Salmond claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting. He also billed the taxpayer £14,100 to try to impeach Tony Blair

 

Martin Salter has not made any claims on his second home allowance since 2004/05

 

Adrian Sanders claimed rent on his London flat of up to £988 a month. Claimed for £55 vase from the Dartington Cider Press Centre in Totnes, Devon

 

Mohammed Sarwar claimed almost £100,000 to cover mortgage interest that he paid from an account with a Swiss bank.

 

Alison Seabeck claims £1,100 a month mortgage interest for her constituency home, but billed £65 for a night in local hotel plus £10 breakfast after she had left her keys in London

 

Andrew Selous designates constituency property as second home, on which he claims monthly mortgage interest payments of more than £1,600

 

Grant Shapps claimed just £7,269 on his second homes allowance in 2007/08

 

Virendra Sharma chose not to claim designated second home expenses under ACA after entering Parliament in a by-election in July, 2007, although he was entitled to them as an outer London MP. Took £1,958 in London supplement in 2007-08 and £15,988 in office expenses.

 

Jonathan Shaw claimed £240 in London hotel bills plus £800 monthly flat renta in March 2005, saying it was being redecorated

 

Barry Sheerman claimed mortgage interest payments of about £900 a month on London second home, £1,338 for 20 in Apple iMac on office expenses

 

Richard Shepherd has repaid £162 to the Fees Office after deciding he should not have claimed for cleaning and gardening at his constituency home

 

Jim Sheridan used his allowances to reclaim the cost of a 42-inch plasma TV, leather bed and hundreds of pounds worth of furniture. Claimed £2,091 for three-seater sofa, two-seater sofa bed, coffee table and lamp table for London home bought from Edinburgh dfs store in March 2006

 

Clare Short claimed thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money to which she was not entitled within months of standing down as a Cabinet minister

 

Mark Simmonds claims up to £2,696 a month for interest-only mortgage on second home in London

 

Sion Simon claimed £5,400 in stamp duty after moving house in London in May 2008. Also claimed £1,850 on refurbishing new home that month

 

Alan Simpson claimed £4,000 towards the cost of replacing the boiler at second home in Lambeth. In September 2007, claimed £10,000 towards £11,020 on stripping out old kitchen

 

David Simpson bought London flat in March 2006. Over two days, claimed £6,234 for furniture. Claimed £1,082 monthly mortgage interest payments

 

Keith Simpson has claimed almost £200 for light bulbs on his expenses

 

Marsha Singh claimed mortgage interest payments for London flat as second home. Claimed for £750 television, £229 DVD player and £400 music player with handwritten receipt

 

Andrew Slaughter is not eligible to claim ACA. In 2007, claimed for a fountain pen nib costing £90 using his IEP

 

Andrew Smith spent more than £30,000 of taxpayers’ money giving his house a makeover

 

Angela Smith sought payment for four beds for a one-bedroom London flat

 

Angela C Smith spent nearly £11,000 over two years on setting up a second home in London

 

Geraldine Smith spent £235 on picture and £185 on mirror for London flat in August 2005. Bought Bali table lamp, floor lamp and three cushions for total of £620 one month later

 

advice using expenses intended to fund their parliamentary and constituency offices. Bought expensive gadgets including an iPhone for her husband.

 

John Smith claimed £57,955 in second home expenses in four years without submitting a single receipt.

 

Sir Robert Smith claimed about £910 a month for mortgage interest payments on Lambeth flat in 2008-09

 

Anne Snelgrove claimed £4,100 for furniture including a bedstead, sofa and chest of drawers. Also claimed £499.97 for a television set, £454.70 for crockery and kitchen equipment, £655 on a table, chairs and bookcase, and £55 on towels.

 

Nicholas Soames claimed up to £1,340 a month for mortgage interest on Westminster home

 

Sir Peter Soulsby fell behind with the rent at his offices but when the £472 bailiffs bill arrived he billed the taxpayer

 

Helen Southworth claims rent on second home in London, which she shares with fellow MP Christine Russell. Claimed £709 for a television, £259 for an air conditioning unit and £239 for a Dyson cleaner

 

John Spellar claims for his constituency home in the West Midlands. Claimed £600 for a tree surgeon, £1.99 for a washing up brush and 47p for a pair of rubber gloves

 

Caroline Spelman made no claims for mortgage interest or rent on her second home in 2006-07 and 2007-08

 

Michael Spicer claimed for work on his helipad and received thousands of pounds for gardening bills

 

Bob Spink claimed about £25,000 for fees and refurbishment when he bought a flat in 2004. Included was £11,000 for decorators’ fees, £3,400 for a leather sofa, £3,000 for carpets and curtains

 

Richard Spring claimed monthly mortgage interest payments of more than £1,300 on a property in Suffolk. Also claimed £35.25 to treat a wasps’ nest

 

Sir John Stanley claims for rent on London flat, also claims for food, utilities, council tax and a cleaner

 

Phyllis Starkey claims for rent on home in consituency, along with utilities and council tax. Also owns a house in Oxford from which rental income is received

 

Anthony Steen claimed £87,000 on country mansion with 500 trees. He has announced he will step down at the next election

 

Ian Stewart claims rent on flat in London. Also claimed for a £500 leather suite and a £1,247 computer bought from the shopping channel QVC

 

Howard Stoate claimed thousands in DIY bills 'to ease the burden on the taxpayer'

 

Gavin Strang claims for his flat in London and for up to £400 per month in food. Also receives rental income from farmland and woodland in Perthshire

 

Jack Straw only paid half the amount of council tax that he claimed on his parliamentary allowances over four years but later rectified the over-claim. Used his office expenses to pay for a degree studied by a member of his staff

 

Gary Streeter claims for the mortgage interest on his constituency home in Plymouth, also claimed for food and £1.60 for a pack of 10 lightbulbs

 

Gisela Stuart claims for mortgage interest on constituency home in Birmingham and up to £2,000 per year for food. Also owns a family home in Worcestershire and a flat in London

 

Graham Stringer: hotel stays when in London and claims up to £4,800 per year for food. Hotel bills have included snacks such as Pringles crisps at £1.75

 

Graham Stuart shares a flat in London with Conservative MP David Mundell, shares costs with him and claims for rent, council tax and utilities. Bills for household items included £426 for duvet, pillows and towels

 

Andrew Stunell claims for mortgage interest on flat in London, also claimed for £5,545 replacement windows by Everest. Claims more than £1,000 per year for food in some years

 

Gerry Sutcliffe claims for mortgage interest on constituency home in Bingley. Claimed £3,790 for fitted bedroom, £2,616 for new gutters and sofit boards, and £1,745 for two sofas

 

Desmond Swayne has a second home in London, on which he paid a £652 monthly mortgage interest in 2005-06. Rose to £711 in 2007-08. Charged £6,131 for new kitchen and £411 for tree work in 2006

 

Jo Swinson included receipts for eyeliner, a “tooth flosser” and 29p dusters with her parliamentary expenses claims

 

Hugo Swire, the former shadow culture secretary, designated his first home in London and claimed for rent at his second home in Devon. He said London was his main home and his daughter went to school in the capital. In June, 2007, he claimed £349 for a satellite navigation system to “cover the 176.25 square miles of his constituency”.

 

Robert Syms claimed more than £2,000 worth of furniture on expenses for his designated second home in London, but had it all delivered to his parents’ address in Wiltshire

 

Mark Tami has a second home in Bromley, Kent. Bought London home in Dec 2007, claimed £9,000 stamp duty and mortgage interest rate increased to £1,300

 

Sir Peter Tapsell claimed rent for second home in London, which rose from £4,821 a quarter in 2006 to £5,417 a quarter in 2008. Total claims over fours years of £87,729

 

Dari Taylor claimed flat in south-east London as second home and charged monthly mortgage interest of £1,000 in 2008. Fees office asked for evidence of mortgage in October 2007

 

David Taylor has a second home in London, monthly mortgage interest payments of £375 in 2005 rose to £700 after buying new second home in 2007

 

Ian Taylor said he will retire at the next election after it emerged that he made second home claims on a flat in London although his main home is within 40 minutes’ commuting distance of Westminster

 

Matthew Taylor claims for flat in London while also owning another flat in London which he rents out. Bills include £350 for gardening, £1,373 for curtains and blinds

 

Richard Taylor claims for renting flat in London and for council tax. No claims for furniture, cleaning, utilities or food

 

Sarah Teather did not claim on her second homes allowance between 2004 and 2008

 

Gareth Thomas used public money to settle a £1,000 accountancy bill to recover a tax "over-payment" of £2,000. Has repaid more than £1,600 he claimed for gardening, £1,200 he overclaimed for council tax and mortgage interest payments and £30 for wine and other personal items

 

Emily Thornberry is not entitled to claim for a second home as an inner London MP. However, takes home the London Supplement, which was £2,812 last year

 

John Thurso claimed rent on designated second home in London and for hotels across Scotland because of “vast area of constituency”. Approved by fees office

 

Stephen Timms is an outer London MP who chooses not to claim second homes allowance. Claims the London Supplement which amounted to £2,812 last year

 

Paddy Tipping claimed mortgage interest payments of about £500 per month on a flat in London. His overall claims were only just over half the maximum amount claimed by some MPs

 

Mark Todd defended his expenses claims as "essentials" but included a marble table and an espresso coffee machine

 

Baroness Tonge claimed mortgage interest on her second home allowance as an MP, then after her retirement leased the property to a fellow MP who in turn recovered the rent from the taxpayer

 

Don Touhig spent thousands of pounds redecorating his constituency home before “flipping” his allowance to a flat in London

 

David Tredinnick tried to claim the £125 cost of attending a course on "intimate relationships" through his Parliamentary expenses

 

Jon Trickett claimed £761.68 per month in mortgage interest payments for a second home in London. Also claimed for food, utilities and council tax

 

Paul Truswell stays in hotels in London while at Westminster, usually paying £119 for a room, also claimed for £4.95 packets of nuts from the minibar. In 2007-08, claimed £2,255 for food and £18 for laundry

 

Andrew Turner used his office expenses to pay for his girlfriend, who is also his parliamentary assistant, to have "life coaching" classes

 

Des Turner claimed mortgage interest payments of up to £450 per month on a flat in London as his designated second home. Also claimed up to £400 per month food. Claimed roughly half of the maximum available under the second homes allowance.

 

Neil Turner claimed for mortgage interest on flat in London, and up to £400 per month for food some months. Also claims utilities, council tax and for small amounts of furniture

 

Derek Twigg moved his designated second home from constituency to flat near Parliament in 2004, now claims £1,343 a month in rent. Claimed £110 for an iron and radio in 2005, and £77 for same items two years later

 

Lord Tyler claimed for the mortgage interest on his family-owned flat in Westminster – and then sold his share to his daughter a month after he quit as an MP

 

Andrew Tyrie nominates a flat in property near his constituency as second home. Claims £700 a month in mortgage interest payments and £6,000 a year on service charges

 

Kitty Ussher resigned as Treasury minister after he expenses files showed she avoided paying up to £17,000 in tax on the sale of her constituency home

 

Ed Vaizey had £2,000 worth of furniture delivered to his London home when he was claiming his Commons allowance on a second home in Oxfordshire.

 

Shailesh Vara tried to claim £1,500 on his expenses for costs incurred before he was elected

 

Keith Vaz claimed £75,500 for a second flat near Parliament even though he already lived just 12 miles from Westminster

 

Sir Peter Viggers included with his expense claims the £1,645 cost of a floating duck house in the garden pond at his Hampshire home. He has announced he will step down at the next election and admitted he made a "ridiculous and grave error of judgment"

 

Theresa Villiers claimed almost £16,000 in stamp duty and professional fees on expenses when she bought a London flat, even though she already had a house in the capital. She has agreed to stop claiming the second home allowance

 

Rudi Vis receives second home allowance and claims £2,300 a month interest on a mortgage he took out in 2006 on his constituency home. Says main home is in Suffolk

 

Charles Walker claims £700 in mortgage interest payments for flat in Wandsworth, constituency home is 21 miles from Westminster. Claimed £6,732 for decoration, carpets, curtains and re-wiring at flat

 

Ben Wallace claimed for more than £700 to stay at Carlton Club after May 2005 general election. Included the cost of at least three Daily Telegraphs on bill. Most claims made up of rent, council tax bills and utility bills

 

Joan Walley claimed for more than £4,400 of furniture in London flat in 2004-05 and a £195 blanket. In 2005-06, claimed for £1,199 LCD Sony television. Fees office cut bill to £750

 

Robert Walter attempted to claim £1,008 for handmade carpets he bought while on a trip to India. Claimed for £16,000 moving costs; estate agents’ commission, stamp duty and solicitors’ fees. Then claimed for two flat screen televisions worth £749 and £399 and eight chairs worth £744

 

Lynda Waltho claimed £1,680 for food in one year. Billed taxpayer for £472 bed, £81 sheets, towels and a pillow and £1,022 of electrical equipment. Also claimed for £380 armchair and £8.32 kettle

 

Claire Ward, the MP responsible for keeping the Queen informed about Parliament, submitted monthly expense claims for hundreds of pounds of "petty cash" while claiming maximum allowances

 

Bob Wareing claimed for more than £4,000 in food bills in 2004-05. Then claimed for £176 air conditioning unit, as well as a £19.99 kettle for his Westminster flat

 

Nigel Waterson claimed mortgage interest/rent payments and food bills at his second home in Beckenham, Kent. Also billed taxpayer £1,055 to paint house and garage

 

Angela Watkinson claimed £3,100 to redecorate flat including new doors, latches and locks in 2005-06. Then claimed £6,350 for a new bathroom, as well as £804 for a television, microwave and fridge

 

Tom Watson and Iain Wright spent £100,000 of taxpayers' money on the London flat they once shared

 

Dave Watts claimed for refurbishment to kitchen (£3,543), bathroom (£3,500) and £742 redecoration. Also claimed for £549 Philips LCD 26 in television

 

Steve Webb sold his London flat and bought another nearby, while the taxpayer picked up an £8,400 bill for stamp duty

 

Mike Weir claimed £1,300 per month rent for his second home in London plus bills for utilities, telephone, council tax and food

 

Alan Whitehead claimed mortgage interest payments of up to £730 per month on his second home in London. Also claimed £1,942.98 for a replacement boiler

 

John Whittingdale claimed £1,828.30 for bathroom fitting, £1,800 for a replacement boiler, £774.50 on a sofa and rug from Laura Ashley and £1,014 on a bed

 

Malcolm Wicks was entitled to claim for a second home allowance but instead claimed for the more moderate London subsidy of £2,812

 

Ann Widdecombe claimed just £858 on her second home allowance in 2007/08. However, she did spend more than £9,000 of taxpayers' money on her own personal newspaper cuttings service over a four year period.

 

Bill Wiggin claimed interest payments for a property which had no mortgage

 

Betty Williams claimed mortgage interest payments of £519 per month on London flat. Also claimed service charge, utilities, telephone and food but made few other claims

 

Hywel Williams claimed more than £1,000 per month in mortgage interest payments on London flat. Also claimed £2,408.75 for a plumbing bill

 

David Willetts, the Conservatives' choice for skills minister, needed help changing light bulbs. He has agreed to repay the bill

 

Alan Williams claimed just £5,221 on his second homes allowance in 2007/08

 

Mark Williams claimed up to £1,300 per month to rent a flat in London as his second home but made few other claims under the allowance

 

Stephen Williams claimed up to £1,500 per month to cover rent at his second home, a flat in London. Also claimed for food and utility bills but made few other claims

 

Roger Williams claimed £1,200 per month in rent for a flat in London, which he designated as his second home. Also claimed for food, utilities and cleaning

 

Phil Willis spent thousands of pounds of public funds on mortgage interest payments, redecoration and furnishings for a flat where his daughter now lives.

 

Jenny Willott claimed up to £1,500 per month to live in a flat in London as her second home. Also claimed £519 for a sofa, £933.50 for a bed and £850 for a mattress

 

Michael Wills claims about £1,120 a month in interest for the mortgage on his house in Wiltshire. On one occasion, the fees office agreed to pay £2,633 for a claim made two months after the deadline for 2005-06 had passed. He said a “genuine mistake” had been made by a “trusted and normally reliable member of staff”.

 

David Wilshire claimed thousands of pounds of taxpayers money for monthly payments towards the cost of replacing curtains and carpets at some point in the future. Claimed up to £1,375 per month in mortgage interest payments and also claimed for council tax, service charges and food

 

Phil Wilson claimed £1,250 per month in rent for a London flat, which he designated as his second home. Also claimed £350 for a sofa bed

 

Rob Wilson did not claim on his second homes allowance between 2004 and 2008

 

Sammy Wilson originally claimed for hotels when in London. Later jointly bought a property in the city with another MP. Claimed £6,150 stamp duty, £1,406.90 solicitors’ fees and £2,914 on furniture

 

David Winnick claimed just £36,354 on his second homes allowance between 2004-8

 

Sir Nicholas Winterton and his wife Ann claimed more than £80,000 for a London flat owned by a trust controlled by their children. They have announced they will stand down at the next general election

 

Rosie Winterton submitted claims for “soundproofing” the bedroom of her London home and received thousands of pounds for gardening and decorating. She paid back more than £8,000 in mortgage payments that she claimed wrongly on her parliamentary expenses

 

Peter Wishart claimed £1,400 per month in rent for a second home in London. Also claimed for food but made few other claims under the second homes allowance

 

Mike Wood claimed just over £500 per month to live in a flat in London. Also claimed £3,421.76 for a central heating boiler, £599.99 for a television and £1,332 for a new bathroom

 

Phil Woolas submitted receipts including comics, nappies and women's clothing as part of his claims for food

 

Shaun Woodward received £100,000 to help pay mortgage

 

Anthony Wright claims rent for London flat, also claimed £498 for TV, £90 for trouser press. Accepted £10,000 cash payment from owners of flat, which meant taxpayer-funded rent went up

 

David Wright accepted a £16,787 payment from the owners of his flat in return for giving up the right to cheap rent, then moved out. Claimed £599 for a TV but a £64.99 claim for a razor was turned down

 

Iain Wright and Tom Watson spent £100,000 of taxpayers' money on the London flat they once shared

 

Jeremy Wright claims for flat in London. Spent £2,884 on furniture when he became an MP, including £809 for a bed and £399 for a television

 

Tony Wright claims for his rent in Dolphin Square complex in London, £995 for Venetian blinds, £1,630 for a new sofa and chairs and £799 for a sideboard

 

Derek Wyatt billed 75p for scotch eggs

 

Tim Yeo claimed for a pink laptop computer from John Lewis in the weeks leading up to Christmas.

 

George Young claimed the maximum second home allowance on his London flat for the past two years. He also billed taxpayers for the cost of a video camera so that he could broadcast clips of himself at work on YouTube

 

Richard Younger-Ross spent £1,235 on four mirrors and bought 'Don Juan’ bookca

  

Hi guys long time no post!

 

Well Ive been meaning to post this picture for along time its another custom ariel doll Ive made but shes smiling/laughing!

 

I also wanted to thank you all for all of the favs and helping me get rid of my doubles. 2014 was pretty fun! I went to Disney world, got my Associates in the Arts!! Any 2015 will be even more AMAZING! I just got accepted to an art college in L.A and I'll be going in the fall which means everything for sale MUST GO!!

 

This year you guys have the option to give me an best offer on all of the dolls, toys, figures, books and items all listed FOR SALE! I will be posting new group pictured of items for sale! they all need to be gone by July! I will be also selling things at local conventions, garage sales and other sidewalk sales. If you see something you want get it now! chances are it will disappear soon. I will not hold anything so everything listed for sale is up for grabs!

 

I also will add freebees and give discounts on group lots!!

 

Don't be afraid to ask :D and thank you all for your business and support :D

The local animal shelter held a garage sale this weekend to raise some much needed funds. They had lots of donated merchandise on offer.

There were about 34 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too for something even cheaper and thus more abuse-able camera probably the old A6000. The A6500, the A6300 are not much better than the ancient A6000......at least in terms of sheer IQ.

Any way, since I recently added Fuji system recently, I would like to just compare the lens line of the Fuji X vs the lens line of the Nikon FX vs the lens lineup of the Sony E mount. Many times I find the excessively hard and nasty lens criticism Sony gets from many reviewers and forum experts are extremely unfair, unfounded and dishonest...... And most of times those extreme critics of Sony lens line have actually never used any of expensive Sony or Zeiss FE primes or do not understand how to test lenses correctly.

So here it goes..........

Is Fuji better for lens selection than Sony or Nikon, or is Fuji at least a cheaper system than a FF system like Sony or Nikon?

Well...yes and no. It is not so simple.

Yes, they have APS-C dedicated fast primes that Sony lacks and their zooms are miles ahead compared to Sony APS-C zooms, but then again, the primes Fuji offers are pretty large and heavy, they lack OS and (esp older versions) have clunky and loud AF motors. And Nikon lenses tend to be much cheaper for the same quality or even a bit better optical performance than Fuji or Sony. However, if I can include FF lenses since I only have FF lenses for my Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would have to say Sony FE and Nikon F are much more complete systems than Fuji X. Plus, Nikon FX has really a lot of cheap thirdparty lenses and other cheap thirdparty accessories with incredibly huge selection of used lens market......

So if the native lens selection and the system performance per dollar is any importance to you , then there is still no mirrorless system better than the Nikon or the Canon system......So it's not all roses and sunshine in Mirrorless camp. I have used Sony system for over a decade and I have collected many lenses for my Sony E and A systems and I have a lot of Nikon lenses as well. Now I have been testing many Fuji lenses and they are indeed very good but not as amazing as many many Fuji fanatics in Fujirumor sites suggest they are, especially with respect to value/performance ratio.

 

Comp 1> 23-25mm FL: Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 vs Fuji 23/1.4 vs Fuji 23/2 vs Nikon 24mm f1.8G AF-S vs Sony SEL24mm f1.8Z.

Here I do not want to but I must admit the Nikon is the best lens especially considering its modest price tag and size. Then I prefer the tiny Fuji 23mm f2 WR for bad environment shooting. But if I have to pick the absolute best lens from this set, then I would have to pick the Batis 25 is a bit sharper lens than the the Fuji 23mm f1.4 or the APS-C dedicated Sony Zeiss. The one serious issue of the Batis 25mm f2 is the extremely pronounced CA in highlight or very high contrasty area, other wise, it is a near perfect lens, and I use it very often on my A7R.

The optical performance of the Fuji 23mm f1.4 is nothing short of amazing too but its mechanical quality is not as great as its optical quality.. The Fuji is very well built on paper and according to the fanboys, and renders OOF area or bokeh very very nicely and of course goes down to 1.4........but the AF is loud and just feels awkward, actually it cannot focus well in extreme lowlight where a really fast prime like it is really needed. It has very nice optical quality though...... the fly-by-wire focus ring is also extremely awkward to use in very dark places. Unlike the excellent Zeiss Batis, the Fuji is not weather-sealed and I doubt it is actually well built, to me it feels very cheap...........

The Sony Zeiss is actually a better lens in terms of build and mechanical quality than the Fuji XF23mm f1.4, very well built and very precise focus system and the AF of the Sony Zeiss is light years ahead of the Fuji XF23mm f1.4.

But again considering the price to performance ratio and pure optical quality and over all real life usability or practicality , the Nikon is the best bargain lens here and I mean by far the best bang for your buck kind of a lens not the absolute best -which, in my opinion, is the Batis 25mm f2.

The Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED is smaller and lighter than the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 lens or the Fuji XF23mm f1.4 lens and the Nikon is a lot cheaper than both the Fuji and Zeiss Batis. The Batis lens is very sharp in the center, but in the edges and corners it is still good but not as sharp as the cheap plastic Nikon f2.8G lens..........the green edged CA is annoying and hard to get rid of in PP, and after getting rid of it in PP, the final output becomes very much softer than without the software correction.

And it has incredibly heavy,pronounced distortion before the extremely heavy handed software correction.......that almost all makers mirrorless cameras apply to all their lenses.

So if MF is fine , I actually prefer my Zeiss 25mm f2 Distagon ZF2 lens for this specific focal length. For AF work, I prefer the Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is an exceptional lens at very very modest affordable price.

Comp 2>At 50-55mm range: Sony FE55mm f1.8Z for Sony E mount vs Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Nikon F vs Fuji 56/1.2 for Fuji X vs Loxia 50mm f2 for Sony E.

Yeah I know, f1.2 vs f1.4 vs f1.8 vs f2 not a very fair optical comparison but still this is the most practical way of comparing the systems since not all of these systems have the same class similar optics with the same max F number...and their respective choice of sensor format is also different...........So the Fuji f1.4 lenses just roughly equal to the Nikon and the Sony f1.8 primes in terms of light gathering power and actual DOF-controllability.

I think most likely people use these systems with AF use these lenses and therefore I would like to compare these. Well the Loxia is pure MF lens but I've thrown it into this mix since it is my personal favorite lens for my E mount body and I use it a lot for video and paid corporate portrait work I sometimes do in the summer season(in the winter I am very busy and I have no time for any kind of part time work).

The Fuji is a very fast f1.2 lens but with very slow AF motor, and again it has the terrible fly-by-wire MF ring, and so does the Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 Z lens. This is very annoying, and this is why I do not like the optically fantastic almost flawless(at least for the price) FE55mm f1.8Z.

The Fuji XF56mm f1.2 has amazing color and micro contrast and almost distortion free even before the usual software correction Fuji applies to any of their lenses, it renders beautiful skin tone with very pleasant bokeh.

Probably the Fuji has better copy to copy variation and tighter QC than Sony on their older fake Zeiss line lenses such as this FE55mm f1.8, the FE35mm f1.4Z, the FE35mm f2.8,though Sony has already improved it with the newer FE 50mm f1.4Z, which is objectively a great lens but I personally dislike for its awkward ergonomics and extreme Lo-CA at wideopen and near wideopen range. The FE55mm f1.8Z has significantly pronounced pincushion distortion but it is automatically corrected in the camera or in ACR or in C1 pro, or in DXO pro, however, that auto lens distortion correction makes the lens significantly softer in the edges and corners than it should have originally been without it. So in final images it usually ends up softer than the Fuji or the big FF Sigma lens on a Nikon body. The Loxia 50mm f2 is a lens designed after the legendary Leica mount Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens and its rendering characteristic is very similar to that of the Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens, but the Sony mount version is significantly sharper in the centers with a lot less lateral CA(still more pronounced green CA than the FE 55 or FE 50mm f1.4 Planar, though). And the Loxia is very good at handling complex contra-light scenes, and so it seldom produces terrible rainbow colored ghost...... , the Loxia is very very tactile and easy to MF precisely for video and for stills even including moderately fast moving things or people. So despite of its slightly slower max speed at f2 , I much prefer it to any of the other around 50mm primes for Sony or Fuji, or any of the Nikon 50mm primes.

However, if I can throw the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus lens into the mix, I prefer it to everything else I've compared here. The new Zeiss for Nikon and Canon mount is simply a superb lens with outstanding MF ring, I can MF it easily at f1.4 and get tack sharp images anytime......it's that good. IMHO, the Milvus 50mm f1.4 is the best 50mm prime ever made out side of the real Leica price territory..........the Leica 50mm f2 APO is slightly better I think but I can no longer afford it , I used to have it for a few months but I sold it to my grandpa(needed the money for my new storage system 70 four tera byte hard drives and 24 one tera byte SSDs, etc). I think the Milvus series is really underrated line of Ziess, it is actually as great as their more famous Otus line without the crazy bulk of the Otus series. I know the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otsus series primes are fantastic optically, but they are too impractical in real life scenes(outside of studio and landscape), and therefore, I am not a fan of them.

I love the Milvus line and the older ZF2 line Zeiss primes more than the new Batis or Loxia line Zeiss primes for Sony ,and I am sometimes thinking about going back to Nikon main for that very reason plus better flash and cheaper more practical lens line-up than the Sony FE or Fuji X.

But if you are simply looking for the best bang for your buck kind of a person, then I think there is nothing really beats the Nikon AF-S50mm f1.4G, which is actually a sharp lens if you shoot it at f2.2 or smaller aperture. And if you are like me tend to stop it down to at least f5.6 or so most of times, then the cheap Nikon 50 mm f1.4G is just as sharp as the expensive Loxia 50mm f2 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or Zony 50mm f1.4 Z. But for me the Milvus and the Loxia are both worth the high prices since they have the best MF ring for the Sony bodies, I really hate the fly-by-wire MF system of Zony or Fuji.

And it is obvious that all current tiny bodied mirrorless systems are overpriced and without the super heavy-handed software correction they can not compete well with the best Zeiss or Sigma primes for Nikon Canon mount system, in fact, the cheap Nikon f1.8G series primes beat many of the expensive Zony, Sony GM , Fuji XF lenses in terms of pure optical and mechanical quality, and it is a shocking fact to many.

I think why you may want to pay high premium for Loxia or Batis line if you shoot Sony FE system is that they seem to have very very high QC tolerances and chances are you may never get a bad copy of it at least an extremely bad one.

 

Comp 3> Sony 24-70mm f2.8GM vs Fuji 16-50mm f2.8 XF, Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD.

No comparison here. Sony should be ashamed with their zooms. Although I had a very good 24-70mm f4 and f2.8GM, they were still way behind what the 16-50mm f2.8, let alone the new Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR......The Sony 24-70mm f4 Z is an OK lens for the modest price and compact size, but the 24-70mm f2.8 GM is a super expensive lens, costing about 300 hundreds more than the Nikon version and still optically not as good as the Nikon, or in fact I believe it is even a bit worse than the Tamron version for Nikon F mount.

In fact, lack of any quality zoom in the bread and butter range for event pros or part time paid photographers in the current Sony lens line up is a big minus point of Sony system regardless of the mirror type...........SLT or mirrorless.

And another issue is no Tamron, Sigma support for Sony E and A mount any more, this is a huge drawback of the system...........to say the least. If there was a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for Sony E mount, I would have bought it and replaced my Nikon mount version of it for my A7R and Nikon D750. It is very pathetic sad that we Sony users are always forced to get the overpriced GM or Batis line lenses even for the focal range where we might want to just get a "good enough" cheap off-brand lens option.

And in fact , in many cases I actually prefer Tamron lenses to Sony or Zeiss E mount lenses even without any discount or like that.

If I had the Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC option for my Sony system, then I wouldn't have bought a few copies of the Batis E 85mm f1.8 OSS and the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM and returned most of these. I simply prefer the Tamron to the Zeiss or Sony regardless of their prices or brand names in this case. The Tamorn 85mm f1.8,35mm f1.8VC, 45mm f1.8 VC, etc, are really great lenses and many times I've considered going back to Nikon main just for these modestly priced but high quality Tamron primes.

 

I think the Sony E16-70mm f4 (recent copies)are quite good, but still no where near the best APS-C zoom Fuji or Nikon makes for their respective APS-C system.........But in this case the Sony lens is at least very versatile and small unlike their FF zooms..........they are pure bogs, especially the 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm f2.8 GM....

 

Comp 4>Sony FE70-200mm f4 OSS, Nikon AF-S70-200mmf4GEDVR, Fuji XF55-200mm f4-5.6ED.

Well, in this comparison, I must say the Sony FE70-200mm f4G, at least the recent copy(made after 2015),is the best in the set. The Sony is cheaper and sharper and comes with tripod collar. The initial 3000 or so copies had the soft 200mm f4 setting issue, but the copies produced after 2015 July are much better, if you read the recent review on the Sony FE70-200mmf4 G at Ephotozine, you see it clearly, it is raved there, and they are usually an anti-Sony, pro Nikon site.

In Japan, the Sony FE70-200mm f4 G SSM lens is one of the biggest bargain lenses, and now Sony is giving a free Zeiss branded Protection filter for any one buys this lens.

So for me, in this range it is a no brainer. It is relatively compact, sharp throughout the range, with very well corrected almost flat field at most of focal range, it is a very very good zoom at very very reasonable price point.

The Nikon AF-S70-200mm f4G ED VR lens was a good lens when it was out. But now it seems really dated and overpriced. It is heavier than the Sony by about 205g, it is a bit longer than the Sony and much bigger and heavier than the relatively small(albeit darker)Fuji. The Nikon is less sharp at 70mm mark than the Sony at all aperture settings, with a bit more pronounced barrel distortion than that of the Sony. At 135mm setting, the Sony is still a bit sharper and better corrected. At 200mm f4, the Nikon might still be a bit sharper at 200mm f4 setting but not by much, the later recently released copies of the Sony is much better than the initially released copies that tested by most of so-called review sites, so you may see it seems much worse than it actually is at 200mm f4 setting at most of review sites, but it has really improved since 2015.

Compared to the cheap but dark Fuji zoom, the Fuji is overrated lens, obviously.

It is not the same class of the zoom as either the Nikon or the Sony 70-200mm f4 zoom. Claiming the XF55-200 dim zoom as good as the Sony FE 70-200mm f4 G is a bit of stretch. IMHO, the Fuji 55-200 is a bit fancier version of a typical kit zoom, that is all about it.

 

Comp 5> around 50mm macro lens: Sony FE 50mm f2.8 macro, Nikon AF-S60mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, Fuji 60mm f1.2 almost macro lens, Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG.

Well there is no need any serious analysis or reading at all about these lenses, I used to have all of these and I only kept the Sony.

The Sony FE 50mm f2.8 Macro is a fantastic lens especially for the modest price tag it carries. After all, it is the third very sharpest prime ever tested on the a7R2 and a7R.

It beats the about 100 US more expensive Nikon 60 G micro hands down, albeit the compromised slow AF, but in macro range no one use AF anyway.

For pure optical quality it is a absolute steal, it has very low CA, thanks to the amazing new ED element, it has very very low distortion, and it produces cool color(not as warm as Zeiss or G branded Sony lenses) and I prefer that personally, but many people especially those who love flowers or people head shots may prefer a bit warmer OOC color.

The Fuji 60mm f2.4 is an excellent lens too but it is not a REAL macro, it is only a half macro kind like the Canon EF24-70mm f4 L IS in macro mode.

So if you need the real macro capability in mirrorless system there is no other choice than the Sony or you must go down to m43 league, and I say go down but as for macro m43 system is not actually worse than FF or especially APS-C system unless you have super expensive macro lens plus macro ring flash and always 100 percent use a tripod.

The m43 allows you to focus stack automatically for better DOF, and it has excellent but reasonably priced compact macro lens choices such as the amazing Olympus 60mm f2.8, the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Leica branded lens, the Olympus and Panasonic 30mm f2.8 macro. And Panasonic will release long awaited X120mm f2.8 G macro lens very soon.

So for me and I think many casual macro shooters the m43 is the most interesting choice for macro work or just simple casual floower close up.

I love Sony 30mm f3.5 on my A6500 too, it is a cheap lens but very practical, you can really abuse it in rain, in cold mountains, etc, and it never breaks. Even if it breaks, hey who cares? it is very cheap indeed. But if you like shooting food or some product like some Star Wars figures or Mickey Mouse doll like I do, then the Sony FE50mm f2.8 macro is an excellent choice especially on the R bodies.

The cheap Sony macro is a bit less sharp than the amazingly sharp FE55mm f1.8Z on the A7R2, but it is just as sharp as the Sonnar on the A7R or the a7M2. And in my test comfortably beats the Loxia 50mm f2 in the center and especially in the edges, albeit a bit more pronounced Lo-CA in highlight or OOF area. In any case, the Sony FE50mm f2.8 is a real bargain deal lens in the current FE system, and this lens and the FE90mm f2.8G prove that actually there are many bargain deal lenses in the current harshly criticized as expensive or overpriced(mostly by non-Sony users) Sony lens system.

Comp 6> around 100mm macro lens: Sony FE90mm f2.8G, Tamron 90 mm f2.8 VC G2, Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, etc.

Well there is really no comp here, the Sony FE 90mm wins hands down as DXO and others all confirm it firmly. I had all of these plus the famous Voiklander 125mm f2.5 APO macro, and the FE 90mm f2.8 G is the absolute winner here, of course the Voiktlander is also a great lens but it is not as practical as the Sony in real life use.

The Sony lens also beats both the Zeiss 100 mm f2 ZF2 and the Milvus version in resolution, CA, distortion, and light fall off, so it is an outstanding lens without any doubt.

The lens really shines on the a7R2, but it is really good on any body but if your sensor is just 24mp FF , then it easily outresolves the low resolution sensor. It actually even outresolves the 42mp sensor. It is that good with respect to sheer resolution and measurable so-called objective IQ.

However, it is not really easy to use in real life since it is big and not balances well on any of Sony A7X body, let alone on any of A6XXX body. I think Sony really needs a bit bigger body for this type of truly outstanding optics that're clearly designed to resolve the next generation high resolution FF. Many internet review sites talk about the latest sensors out-resolving the lenses very often as the biggest issue of the high resolution FF camera system, but it is a big myth or even lie, it is better to have a sensor easily out-resolves any lens you can put on it because it really eliminates all sorts of bad sensor artifacts issues.

 

Body wise, I can only repeat what I said before. The last APS-C body I personally bought with my own money was the Sony A6500 and it feels good in my hands and it has great quality RAW file but terrible jpg's just like all the other Sony cameras. The shutter sounds very cheap with helplessly bad shutter shock, the rolling shutter in Electronic shutter mode is very bad and it gets even worse in video mode. But I never have the infamous heat issue with my A6500 in stills mode, just in video mode. My A6300 has terrible heat issue both in stills and in motion modes. I do not really have any issue with Sony menu system any more but I am already extremely used to it by using almost every single Sony AXXX and A7X camera........the short battery life issue is already solved since I have special USB charger for my mirrorless cameras and I have already collected 12 Sony batteries since the first NEX5. And to be fair to Sony, no other company mirrorless system has better battery life than these Sony cameras. So over all despite of the flawed mount design and questionable mechanical quality with terribly slow general operation speed of these cameras, I think Sony E mount system seems like still the best cost effective choice in the current mirrorless world with respect to simple body usability aspect of camera system, especially if you do not mind using fullframe lenses on an APS-C body.

The X-T2 is built like a tank but quite a bit heavier in the hand than the A6300 but not much heavier than the new A6500, which I also own and think also built like a tank.

The A7R2 is even heavier than the Fuji, albeit the lower quality body material used and poor body sealing quality. The Fuji is a much faster camera in the real world use, it shoots much faster than the A6300, the A7R2 or the A7M2 but the A6500 is even faster than the XT2 with a much longer lasting big buffer. However, the A6500 does not have any sort of external grip option that might have helped the balance of the system when a long tele photo lens is mounted on the camera, so the real life usability of the Fuji with a big AF lens is better than that of the A6500. The A6500 and the A6300 have very fast single shot AF and decent C AF in good light, so they should have had an external grip option for better balance with a big tele photo lens for action shooting.

The eye-detect AF and faceAF on the Fuji is just OK compared to the Sony's, but it is the only one aspect of AF performance where the Sony APS-C beats the Fuji XT2 or X-Pro2. But I am sure none of the current APS-C and FF mirrorless are as good as the upcoming GH5(that I've already pre-ordered and consider as a game-changer) with respect to AF performance and in general operation speed.

The Panasonic has the best AF in mirrorless world but even that is not even close to the decent Canon or Nikon D-SLR for action tracking. The D500 still blows anything from Sony, Fuji, Olympus out of the water and the AF performance gap in real lowlight between the best mirrorless and the mid level D-SLRs such as the D7200 and 80D is not getting smaller but bigger, IMHO, especially when a big telephoto lens is mounted on them. Mirrorless lowlight AF is actually not getting any better except with Panasonic system, this is a real shame. But all other areas of AF performance the Panasonic GH5 and the G85 are both better than any D-SLR, period. These two Panaosnics can focus down to minus 4EV without any issue, any D-SLR or other brand mirrorless cameras cannot even touch it with respect to extreme lowlight AF accuracy......The Sony A7MK2 on paper can focus down to the same level of lowlight minus 4EV, but in real life the Panasonic is a lot better in these extreme lowlight scenes.

The Jpeg quality of the Fuji is quite amazing and sometimes saves a lot of time, so I kind of appreciate that. But the Fuji XT2 or XP2, or even much cheaper new XT20 still have the infamous dust issue as with the Sony A7X and A6XXX........and this is the real reason I can never shoot my Sony or Fuji in Jpeg mode, I always need to remove about 46 dustspots in the sky whenever I use my XT2, A6300, A7M2, A7R2, or A6500, they really have severe dust issue and the worst of all the sensor of the A6500, the A7R2 and the A7M2 is very very difficult to clean safely without sending them in for Sony service center. The sensor of the Fuji's and the older Sony are at least much easier to clean without damaging the sensor or IBIS. I think the really effective automatic dust reduction system of the m43 is really underrated, and it is, I consider, one of these most effective real life weapons of the m43 system that Olympus and Panasonic might be able to effectively use against the others in their marketing or educational materials.

This is the main reason why I sold my A7X2 series cameras and kept my A6300/A6500 and A7R.

As for Fuji UI and controls initially I liked it and I was finding my way around the camera very easily and the Q menu of the Fuji system much easier and more logical to use than any Sony menu system, there is no comparison in this department and I think Sony should focus on this area and also the over all usability with increased operation speed of the camera "system". However, I quickly found out the amazing controls and UI of Fuji that all Fuji fanatics in Fuji rumor sites rave about is kind of working against me or many non retro prime shooters around me. I really hate the retro style bodies and controls inherited or borrowed from film era "my granpa generation", who was one of those anti-Vietnam war hipsters wearing crazy bell bottom jeans and flare shirts.

For me the film era UI and controls are very very difficult to use and very much stressful on my peace of mind. When I was shooting the XT2 there were times I literally felt wanting to throw it onto my grandpa's concrete car garage.....using it for a long period of time every day was that frustrating.

 

I think both the Fuji and the Sony system have serious lens issues; there is no thirdparty lens support other than obscure manual prime options from cheap obscure names. Zeiss makes a great set of primes for Sony and a couple for Fuji, but they are all primes.....

I think they need more great zooms than primes to become true rivals to Canon and Nikon system for really budget minded average camera buyers. I think they really need to persuade Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang to re-enter into the system.

Lack of any decent quality zoom in the so-called bread and butter focal range for the Sony or the Fuji mount system is a huge issue for many. There are no decent quality zooms in 100-400 range or 24-70mm FF equivalent range...........even if you accept to pay 2k for each zoom range. And in case of Sony, their 70-200mm f2.8GM OSS is a expensive but horrible lens with really bad quality control and copy to copy variation to date...

I have tested three copies of that lens and all of these 3 were terribly de-centered.

They all have terrible anti-flare coating and they all produced terrible green or magenta/ orange rainbow colored ghost and spot flare......and the distortion at the 70mm mark on this lens was simply monstorus, very very difficult to correct in PP. At the 200mm mark on this lens it gets even worse, the pinchusioning type of distortion at the 200mm mark on this lens is even harder to correct than the barrel type distortion at the 70mm mark.

If you are a pure prime shooter, then you might love the current great FE prime lineup and XF prime lineup, but for a mostly zoom shooter or for a documentary type of work that really requires a great mid range zoom, the Sony E system and the Fuji X system are both not great. Especially not great for those events where you do not want to change lenses over and over due to the dust issue or due to your shooting objects move fast, or you cannot simply zoom with your feet.

So while I think the Sony and the Fuji systems are really good for studio or landscape or location work where you can safely change lenses all the time and allowed to work on a tripod at very slow pace. But for any thing requires speed or a set of great 24-70 or 70-200 and 100-400 kind of zooms , they are just a pure joke, simply useless systems.

And for that type of works the DSLRs are much cheaper and much more trusted tools due to the much faster general operation speed, much better zoom lineup, much better third party lens support, much more reliable flash system,etc.

All that said both the Fuji and the Sony system are already very good for most of normal use cases and getting better and better every iteration, so I am quite positive about their short term future success.....but not very sure in the longer run............especially considering the fact Nikon and Canon will get more serious about their mirrorless offerings very soon.

And in case of Canon they are already no2 in mirrorless market only second to Olympus in total unit sales, and only second to Sony in market share by value.

I think if the Sony FE system and Fuji X system will not sell very well, or will not better the all Canon Nikon D-SLRs in unit based market share, no thirdparty will make a great set of zooms or any decent moderately fast primes at reasonable prices, and this extreme focus on highend market of Fuji and Sony may eventually hurt them seriously.

In order to get more NEW users coming into their systems they really need attractive lowend bodies like improved more rugged version of their X-A3 or A5100. In case of Fuji the cheap but very capable X-T20 may rectify this issue, but still they have very expensive (for those potential consumer body buyers)lens line issue and that must be fixed or they will slowly lose the momentum they've got since the XT2.

Personally, if I have to choose all from scratch again, then I would still choose the Sony system as my main system and maybe m43 to back it up for documentary work done while I am traveling. IMHO, the Olympus EM1MK2 or the Panasonic GH5 or the G85 based m43 system is much better than the Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 based system, at least much more practical with more stabilized lenses and much better flash capability.

So the m43 for action travel and video, the Sony FE for serious tripod work is still the logical choice for me.

 

I think Nikon is the best value system for most of things still, but I just cannot go back to D-SLR main, I feel it really odd whenever I look into the OVF of my D750. It feels really anachronistic and I do not like it at all, I always try hard to like it, though.

I really think Nikon needs a serious mirrorless system that fully utilizes all the current great Nikon F mount lenses at very least the E series lenses, or they will slowly falling into the irrelevant category.

After having owned about 22 Sony cameras in last 11 years or so, I have come to realize I can never fully trust Sony in the long run, and always looking for something else to move to or simply better value system, but I cannot find anything better than my current E mount set up just yet. But the continuously pushing the user base to their higher end products by incessantly replacing or discontinuing products that they do think not high-end enough or highly profitable enough for them eventually hurts them because this strategy will eventually exhaust many of their long time faithful users and at the same time it will scare potential new users away.

  

This was probably the midpoint of the bridge.

 

There were about 74 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too for something even cheaper and thus more abuse-able camera probably the old A6000. The A6500, the A6300 are not much better than the ancient A6000......at least in terms of sheer IQ.

Any way, since I recently added Fuji system recently, I would like to just compare the lens line of the Fuji X vs the lens line of the Nikon FX vs the lens lineup of the Sony E mount. Many times I find the excessively hard and nasty lens criticism Sony gets from many reviewers and forum experts are extremely unfair, unfounded and dishonest...... And most of times those extreme critics of Sony lens line have actually never used any of expensive Sony or Zeiss FE primes or do not understand how to test lenses correctly.

So here it goes..........

Is Fuji better for lens selection than Sony or Nikon, or is Fuji at least a cheaper system than a FF system like Sony or Nikon?

Well...yes and no. It is not so simple.

Yes, they have APS-C dedicated fast primes that Sony lacks and their zooms are miles ahead compared to Sony APS-C zooms, but then again, the primes Fuji offers are pretty large and heavy, they lack OS and (esp older versions) have clunky and loud AF motors. And Nikon lenses tend to be much cheaper for the same quality or even a bit better optical performance than Fuji or Sony. However, if I can include FF lenses since I only have FF lenses for my Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would have to say Sony FE and Nikon F are much more complete systems than Fuji X. Plus, Nikon FX has really a lot of cheap thirdparty lenses and other cheap thirdparty accessories with incredibly huge selection of used lens market......

So if the native lens selection and the system performance per dollar is any importance to you , then there is still no mirrorless system better than the Nikon or the Canon system......So it's not all roses and sunshine in Mirrorless camp. I have used Sony system for over a decade and I have collected many lenses for my Sony E and A systems and I have a lot of Nikon lenses as well. Now I have been testing many Fuji lenses and they are indeed very good but not as amazing as many many Fuji fanatics in Fujirumor sites suggest they are, especially with respect to value/performance ratio.

 

Comp 1> 23-25mm FL: Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 vs Fuji 23/1.4 vs Fuji 23/2 vs Nikon 24mm f1.8G AF-S vs Sony SEL24mm f1.8Z.

Here I do not want to but I must admit the Nikon is the best lens especially considering its modest price tag and size. Then I prefer the tiny Fuji 23mm f2 WR for bad environment shooting. But if I have to pick the absolute best lens from this set, then I would have to pick the Batis 25 is a bit sharper lens than the the Fuji 23mm f1.4 or the APS-C dedicated Sony Zeiss. The one serious issue of the Batis 25mm f2 is the extremely pronounced CA in highlight or very high contrasty area, other wise, it is a near perfect lens, and I use it very often on my A7R.

The optical performance of the Fuji 23mm f1.4 is nothing short of amazing too but its mechanical quality is not as great as its optical quality.. The Fuji is very well built on paper and according to the fanboys, and renders OOF area or bokeh very very nicely and of course goes down to 1.4........but the AF is loud and just feels awkward, actually it cannot focus well in extreme lowlight where a really fast prime like it is really needed. It has very nice optical quality though...... the fly-by-wire focus ring is also extremely awkward to use in very dark places. Unlike the excellent Zeiss Batis, the Fuji is not weather-sealed and I doubt it is actually well built, to me it feels very cheap...........

The Sony Zeiss is actually a better lens in terms of build and mechanical quality than the Fuji XF23mm f1.4, very well built and very precise focus system and the AF of the Sony Zeiss is light years ahead of the Fuji XF23mm f1.4.

But again considering the price to performance ratio and pure optical quality and over all real life usability or practicality , the Nikon is the best bargain lens here and I mean by far the best bang for your buck kind of a lens not the absolute best -which, in my opinion, is the Batis 25mm f2.

The Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED is smaller and lighter than the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 lens or the Fuji XF23mm f1.4 lens and the Nikon is a lot cheaper than both the Fuji and Zeiss Batis. The Batis lens is very sharp in the center, but in the edges and corners it is still good but not as sharp as the cheap plastic Nikon f2.8G lens..........the green edged CA is annoying and hard to get rid of in PP, and after getting rid of it in PP, the final output becomes very much softer than without the software correction.

And it has incredibly heavy,pronounced distortion before the extremely heavy handed software correction.......that almost all makers mirrorless cameras apply to all their lenses.

So if MF is fine , I actually prefer my Zeiss 25mm f2 Distagon ZF2 lens for this specific focal length. For AF work, I prefer the Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is an exceptional lens at very very modest affordable price.

Comp 2>At 50-55mm range: Sony FE55mm f1.8Z for Sony E mount vs Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Nikon F vs Fuji 56/1.2 for Fuji X vs Loxia 50mm f2 for Sony E.

Yeah I know, f1.2 vs f1.4 vs f1.8 vs f2 not a very fair optical comparison but still this is the most practical way of comparing the systems since not all of these systems have the same class similar optics with the same max F number...and their respective choice of sensor format is also different...........So the Fuji f1.4 lenses just roughly equal to the Nikon and the Sony f1.8 primes in terms of light gathering power and actual DOF-controllability.

I think most likely people use these systems with AF use these lenses and therefore I would like to compare these. Well the Loxia is pure MF lens but I've thrown it into this mix since it is my personal favorite lens for my E mount body and I use it a lot for video and paid corporate portrait work I sometimes do in the summer season(in the winter I am very busy and I have no time for any kind of part time work).

The Fuji is a very fast f1.2 lens but with very slow AF motor, and again it has the terrible fly-by-wire MF ring, and so does the Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 Z lens. This is very annoying, and this is why I do not like the optically fantastic almost flawless(at least for the price) FE55mm f1.8Z.

The Fuji XF56mm f1.2 has amazing color and micro contrast and almost distortion free even before the usual software correction Fuji applies to any of their lenses, it renders beautiful skin tone with very pleasant bokeh.

Probably the Fuji has better copy to copy variation and tighter QC than Sony on their older fake Zeiss line lenses such as this FE55mm f1.8, the FE35mm f1.4Z, the FE35mm f2.8,though Sony has already improved it with the newer FE 50mm f1.4Z, which is objectively a great lens but I personally dislike for its awkward ergonomics and extreme Lo-CA at wideopen and near wideopen range. The FE55mm f1.8Z has significantly pronounced pincushion distortion but it is automatically corrected in the camera or in ACR or in C1 pro, or in DXO pro, however, that auto lens distortion correction makes the lens significantly softer in the edges and corners than it should have originally been without it. So in final images it usually ends up softer than the Fuji or the big FF Sigma lens on a Nikon body. The Loxia 50mm f2 is a lens designed after the legendary Leica mount Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens and its rendering characteristic is very similar to that of the Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens, but the Sony mount version is significantly sharper in the centers with a lot less lateral CA(still more pronounced green CA than the FE 55 or FE 50mm f1.4 Planar, though). And the Loxia is very good at handling complex contra-light scenes, and so it seldom produces terrible rainbow colored ghost...... , the Loxia is very very tactile and easy to MF precisely for video and for stills even including moderately fast moving things or people. So despite of its slightly slower max speed at f2 , I much prefer it to any of the other around 50mm primes for Sony or Fuji, or any of the Nikon 50mm primes.

However, if I can throw the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus lens into the mix, I prefer it to everything else I've compared here. The new Zeiss for Nikon and Canon mount is simply a superb lens with outstanding MF ring, I can MF it easily at f1.4 and get tack sharp images anytime......it's that good. IMHO, the Milvus 50mm f1.4 is the best 50mm prime ever made out side of the real Leica price territory..........the Leica 50mm f2 APO is slightly better I think but I can no longer afford it , I used to have it for a few months but I sold it to my grandpa(needed the money for my new storage system 70 four tera byte hard drives and 24 one tera byte SSDs, etc). I think the Milvus series is really underrated line of Ziess, it is actually as great as their more famous Otus line without the crazy bulk of the Otus series. I know the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otsus series primes are fantastic optically, but they are too impractical in real life scenes(outside of studio and landscape), and therefore, I am not a fan of them.

I love the Milvus line and the older ZF2 line Zeiss primes more than the new Batis or Loxia line Zeiss primes for Sony ,and I am sometimes thinking about going back to Nikon main for that very reason plus better flash and cheaper more practical lens line-up than the Sony FE or Fuji X.

But if you are simply looking for the best bang for your buck kind of a person, then I think there is nothing really beats the Nikon AF-S50mm f1.4G, which is actually a sharp lens if you shoot it at f2.2 or smaller aperture. And if you are like me tend to stop it down to at least f5.6 or so most of times, then the cheap Nikon 50 mm f1.4G is just as sharp as the expensive Loxia 50mm f2 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or Zony 50mm f1.4 Z. But for me the Milvus and the Loxia are both worth the high prices since they have the best MF ring for the Sony bodies, I really hate the fly-by-wire MF system of Zony or Fuji.

And it is obvious that all current tiny bodied mirrorless systems are overpriced and without the super heavy-handed software correction they can not compete well with the best Zeiss or Sigma primes for Nikon Canon mount system, in fact, the cheap Nikon f1.8G series primes beat many of the expensive Zony, Sony GM , Fuji XF lenses in terms of pure optical and mechanical quality, and it is a shocking fact to many.

I think why you may want to pay high premium for Loxia or Batis line if you shoot Sony FE system is that they seem to have very very high QC tolerances and chances are you may never get a bad copy of it at least an extremely bad one.

 

Comp 3> Sony 24-70mm f2.8GM vs Fuji 16-50mm f2.8 XF, Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD.

No comparison here. Sony should be ashamed with their zooms. Although I had a very good 24-70mm f4 and f2.8GM, they were still way behind what the 16-50mm f2.8, let alone the new Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR......The Sony 24-70mm f4 Z is an OK lens for the modest price and compact size, but the 24-70mm f2.8 GM is a super expensive lens, costing about 300 hundreds more than the Nikon version and still optically not as good as the Nikon, or in fact I believe it is even a bit worse than the Tamron version for Nikon F mount.

In fact, lack of any quality zoom in the bread and butter range for event pros or part time paid photographers in the current Sony lens line up is a big minus point of Sony system regardless of the mirror type...........SLT or mirrorless.

And another issue is no Tamron, Sigma support for Sony E and A mount any more, this is a huge drawback of the system...........to say the least. If there was a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for Sony E mount, I would have bought it and replaced my Nikon mount version of it for my A7R and Nikon D750. It is very pathetic sad that we Sony users are always forced to get the overpriced GM or Batis line lenses even for the focal range where we might want to just get a "good enough" cheap off-brand lens option.

And in fact , in many cases I actually prefer Tamron lenses to Sony or Zeiss E mount lenses even without any discount or like that.

If I had the Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC option for my Sony system, then I wouldn't have bought a few copies of the Batis E 85mm f1.8 OSS and the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM and returned most of these. I simply prefer the Tamron to the Zeiss or Sony regardless of their prices or brand names in this case. The Tamorn 85mm f1.8,35mm f1.8VC, 45mm f1.8 VC, etc, are really great lenses and many times I've considered going back to Nikon main just for these modestly priced but high quality Tamron primes.

 

I think the Sony E16-70mm f4 (recent copies)are quite good, but still no where near the best APS-C zoom Fuji or Nikon makes for their respective APS-C system.........But in this case the Sony lens is at least very versatile and small unlike their FF zooms..........they are pure bogs, especially the 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm f2.8 GM....

 

Comp 4>Sony FE70-200mm f4 OSS, Nikon AF-S70-200mmf4GEDVR, Fuji XF55-200mm f4-5.6ED.

Well, in this comparison, I must say the Sony FE70-200mm f4G, at least the recent copy(made after 2015),is the best in the set. The Sony is cheaper and sharper and comes with tripod collar. The initial 3000 or so copies had the soft 200mm f4 setting issue, but the copies produced after 2015 July are much better, if you read the recent review on the Sony FE70-200mmf4 G at Ephotozine, you see it clearly, it is raved there, and they are usually an anti-Sony, pro Nikon site.

In Japan, the Sony FE70-200mm f4 G SSM lens is one of the biggest bargain lenses, and now Sony is giving a free Zeiss branded Protection filter for any one buys this lens.

So for me, in this range it is a no brainer. It is relatively compact, sharp throughout the range, with very well corrected almost flat field at most of focal range, it is a very very good zoom at very very reasonable price point.

The Nikon AF-S70-200mm f4G ED VR lens was a good lens when it was out. But now it seems really dated and overpriced. It is heavier than the Sony by about 205g, it is a bit longer than the Sony and much bigger and heavier than the relatively small(albeit darker)Fuji. The Nikon is less sharp at 70mm mark than the Sony at all aperture settings, with a bit more pronounced barrel distortion than that of the Sony. At 135mm setting, the Sony is still a bit sharper and better corrected. At 200mm f4, the Nikon might still be a bit sharper at 200mm f4 setting but not by much, the later recently released copies of the Sony is much better than the initially released copies that tested by most of so-called review sites, so you may see it seems much worse than it actually is at 200mm f4 setting at most of review sites, but it has really improved since 2015.

Compared to the cheap but dark Fuji zoom, the Fuji is overrated lens, obviously.

It is not the same class of the zoom as either the Nikon or the Sony 70-200mm f4 zoom. Claiming the XF55-200 dim zoom as good as the Sony FE 70-200mm f4 G is a bit of stretch. IMHO, the Fuji 55-200 is a bit fancier version of a typical kit zoom, that is all about it.

 

Comp 5> around 50mm macro lens: Sony FE 50mm f2.8 macro, Nikon AF-S60mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, Fuji 60mm f1.2 almost macro lens, Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG.

Well there is no need any serious analysis or reading at all about these lenses, I used to have all of these and I only kept the Sony.

The Sony FE 50mm f2.8 Macro is a fantastic lens especially for the modest price tag it carries. After all, it is the third very sharpest prime ever tested on the a7R2 and a7R.

It beats the about 100 US more expensive Nikon 60 G micro hands down, albeit the compromised slow AF, but in macro range no one use AF anyway.

For pure optical quality it is a absolute steal, it has very low CA, thanks to the amazing new ED element, it has very very low distortion, and it produces cool color(not as warm as Zeiss or G branded Sony lenses) and I prefer that personally, but many people especially those who love flowers or people head shots may prefer a bit warmer OOC color.

The Fuji 60mm f2.4 is an excellent lens too but it is not a REAL macro, it is only a half macro kind like the Canon EF24-70mm f4 L IS in macro mode.

So if you need the real macro capability in mirrorless system there is no other choice than the Sony or you must go down to m43 league, and I say go down but as for macro m43 system is not actually worse than FF or especially APS-C system unless you have super expensive macro lens plus macro ring flash and always 100 percent use a tripod.

The m43 allows you to focus stack automatically for better DOF, and it has excellent but reasonably priced compact macro lens choices such as the amazing Olympus 60mm f2.8, the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Leica branded lens, the Olympus and Panasonic 30mm f2.8 macro. And Panasonic will release long awaited X120mm f2.8 G macro lens very soon.

So for me and I think many casual macro shooters the m43 is the most interesting choice for macro work or just simple casual floower close up.

I love Sony 30mm f3.5 on my A6500 too, it is a cheap lens but very practical, you can really abuse it in rain, in cold mountains, etc, and it never breaks. Even if it breaks, hey who cares? it is very cheap indeed. But if you like shooting food or some product like some Star Wars figures or Mickey Mouse doll like I do, then the Sony FE50mm f2.8 macro is an excellent choice especially on the R bodies.

The cheap Sony macro is a bit less sharp than the amazingly sharp FE55mm f1.8Z on the A7R2, but it is just as sharp as the Sonnar on the A7R or the a7M2. And in my test comfortably beats the Loxia 50mm f2 in the center and especially in the edges, albeit a bit more pronounced Lo-CA in highlight or OOF area. In any case, the Sony FE50mm f2.8 is a real bargain deal lens in the current FE system, and this lens and the FE90mm f2.8G prove that actually there are many bargain deal lenses in the current harshly criticized as expensive or overpriced(mostly by non-Sony users) Sony lens system.

Comp 6> around 100mm macro lens: Sony FE90mm f2.8G, Tamron 90 mm f2.8 VC G2, Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, etc.

Well there is really no comp here, the Sony FE 90mm wins hands down as DXO and others all confirm it firmly. I had all of these plus the famous Voiklander 125mm f2.5 APO macro, and the FE 90mm f2.8 G is the absolute winner here, of course the Voiktlander is also a great lens but it is not as practical as the Sony in real life use.

The Sony lens also beats both the Zeiss 100 mm f2 ZF2 and the Milvus version in resolution, CA, distortion, and light fall off, so it is an outstanding lens without any doubt.

The lens really shines on the a7R2, but it is really good on any body but if your sensor is just 24mp FF , then it easily outresolves the low resolution sensor. It actually even outresolves the 42mp sensor. It is that good with respect to sheer resolution and measurable so-called objective IQ.

However, it is not really easy to use in real life since it is big and not balances well on any of Sony A7X body, let alone on any of A6XXX body. I think Sony really needs a bit bigger body for this type of truly outstanding optics that're clearly designed to resolve the next generation high resolution FF. Many internet review sites talk about the latest sensors out-resolving the lenses very often as the biggest issue of the high resolution FF camera system, but it is a big myth or even lie, it is better to have a sensor easily out-resolves any lens you can put on it because it really eliminates all sorts of bad sensor artifacts issues.

 

Body wise, I can only repeat what I said before. The last APS-C body I personally bought with my own money was the Sony A6500 and it feels good in my hands and it has great quality RAW file but terrible jpg's just like all the other Sony cameras. The shutter sounds very cheap with helplessly bad shutter shock, the rolling shutter in Electronic shutter mode is very bad and it gets even worse in video mode. But I never have the infamous heat issue with my A6500 in stills mode, just in video mode. My A6300 has terrible heat issue both in stills and in motion modes. I do not really have any issue with Sony menu system any more but I am already extremely used to it by using almost every single Sony AXXX and A7X camera........the short battery life issue is already solved since I have special USB charger for my mirrorless cameras and I have already collected 12 Sony batteries since the first NEX5. And to be fair to Sony, no other company mirrorless system has better battery life than these Sony cameras. So over all despite of the flawed mount design and questionable mechanical quality with terribly slow general operation speed of these cameras, I think Sony E mount system seems like still the best cost effective choice in the current mirrorless world with respect to simple body usability aspect of camera system, especially if you do not mind using fullframe lenses on an APS-C body.

The X-T2 is built like a tank but quite a bit heavier in the hand than the A6300 but not much heavier than the new A6500, which I also own and think also built like a tank.

The A7R2 is even heavier than the Fuji, albeit the lower quality body material used and poor body sealing quality. The Fuji is a much faster camera in the real world use, it shoots much faster than the A6300, the A7R2 or the A7M2 but the A6500 is even faster than the XT2 with a much longer lasting big buffer. However, the A6500 does not have any sort of external grip option that might have helped the balance of the system when a long tele photo lens is mounted on the camera, so the real life usability of the Fuji with a big AF lens is better than that of the A6500. The A6500 and the A6300 have very fast single shot AF and decent C AF in good light, so they should have had an external grip option for better balance with a big tele photo lens for action shooting.

The eye-detect AF and faceAF on the Fuji is just OK compared to the Sony's, but it is the only one aspect of AF performance where the Sony APS-C beats the Fuji XT2 or X-Pro2. But I am sure none of the current APS-C and FF mirrorless are as good as the upcoming GH5(that I've already pre-ordered and consider as a game-changer) with respect to AF performance and in general operation speed.

The Panasonic has the best AF in mirrorless world but even that is not even close to the decent Canon or Nikon D-SLR for action tracking. The D500 still blows anything from Sony, Fuji, Olympus out of the water and the AF performance gap in real lowlight between the best mirrorless and the mid level D-SLRs such as the D7200 and 80D is not getting smaller but bigger, IMHO, especially when a big telephoto lens is mounted on them. Mirrorless lowlight AF is actually not getting any better except with Panasonic system, this is a real shame. But all other areas of AF performance the Panasonic GH5 and the G85 are both better than any D-SLR, period. These two Panaosnics can focus down to minus 4EV without any issue, any D-SLR or other brand mirrorless cameras cannot even touch it with respect to extreme lowlight AF accuracy......The Sony A7MK2 on paper can focus down to the same level of lowlight minus 4EV, but in real life the Panasonic is a lot better in these extreme lowlight scenes.

The Jpeg quality of the Fuji is quite amazing and sometimes saves a lot of time, so I kind of appreciate that. But the Fuji XT2 or XP2, or even much cheaper new XT20 still have the infamous dust issue as with the Sony A7X and A6XXX........and this is the real reason I can never shoot my Sony or Fuji in Jpeg mode, I always need to remove about 46 dustspots in the sky whenever I use my XT2, A6300, A7M2, A7R2, or A6500, they really have severe dust issue and the worst of all the sensor of the A6500, the A7R2 and the A7M2 is very very difficult to clean safely without sending them in for Sony service center. The sensor of the Fuji's and the older Sony are at least much easier to clean without damaging the sensor or IBIS. I think the really effective automatic dust reduction system of the m43 is really underrated, and it is, I consider, one of these most effective real life weapons of the m43 system that Olympus and Panasonic might be able to effectively use against the others in their marketing or educational materials.

This is the main reason why I sold my A7X2 series cameras and kept my A6300/A6500 and A7R.

As for Fuji UI and controls initially I liked it and I was finding my way around the camera very easily and the Q menu of the Fuji system much easier and more logical to use than any Sony menu system, there is no comparison in this department and I think Sony should focus on this area and also the over all usability with increased operation speed of the camera "system". However, I quickly found out the amazing controls and UI of Fuji that all Fuji fanatics in Fuji rumor sites rave about is kind of working against me or many non retro prime shooters around me. I really hate the retro style bodies and controls inherited or borrowed from film era "my granpa generation", who was one of those anti-Vietnam war hipsters wearing crazy bell bottom jeans and flare shirts.

For me the film era UI and controls are very very difficult to use and very much stressful on my peace of mind. When I was shooting the XT2 there were times I literally felt wanting to throw it onto my grandpa's concrete car garage.....using it for a long period of time every day was that frustrating.

 

I think both the Fuji and the Sony system have serious lens issues; there is no thirdparty lens support other than obscure manual prime options from cheap obscure names. Zeiss makes a great set of primes for Sony and a couple for Fuji, but they are all primes.....

I think they need more great zooms than primes to become true rivals to Canon and Nikon system for really budget minded average camera buyers. I think they really need to persuade Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang to re-enter into the system.

Lack of any decent quality zoom in the so-called bread and butter focal range for the Sony or the Fuji mount system is a huge issue for many. There are no decent quality zooms in 100-400 range or 24-70mm FF equivalent range...........even if you accept to pay 2k for each zoom range. And in case of Sony, their 70-200mm f2.8GM OSS is a expensive but horrible lens with really bad quality control and copy to copy variation to date...

I have tested three copies of that lens and all of these 3 were terribly de-centered.

They all have terrible anti-flare coating and they all produced terrible green or magenta/ orange rainbow colored ghost and spot flare......and the distortion at the 70mm mark on this lens was simply monstorus, very very difficult to correct in PP. At the 200mm mark on this lens it gets even worse, the pinchusioning type of distortion at the 200mm mark on this lens is even harder to correct than the barrel type distortion at the 70mm mark.

If you are a pure prime shooter, then you might love the current great FE prime lineup and XF prime lineup, but for a mostly zoom shooter or for a documentary type of work that really requires a great mid range zoom, the Sony E system and the Fuji X system are both not great. Especially not great for those events where you do not want to change lenses over and over due to the dust issue or due to your shooting objects move fast, or you cannot simply zoom with your feet.

So while I think the Sony and the Fuji systems are really good for studio or landscape or location work where you can safely change lenses all the time and allowed to work on a tripod at very slow pace. But for any thing requires speed or a set of great 24-70 or 70-200 and 100-400 kind of zooms , they are just a pure joke, simply useless systems.

And for that type of works the DSLRs are much cheaper and much more trusted tools due to the much faster general operation speed, much better zoom lineup, much better third party lens support, much more reliable flash system,etc.

All that said both the Fuji and the Sony system are already very good for most of normal use cases and getting better and better every iteration, so I am quite positive about their short term future success.....but not very sure in the longer run............especially considering the fact Nikon and Canon will get more serious about their mirrorless offerings very soon.

And in case of Canon they are already no2 in mirrorless market only second to Olympus in total unit sales, and only second to Sony in market share by value.

I think if the Sony FE system and Fuji X system will not sell very well, or will not better the all Canon Nikon D-SLRs in unit based market share, no thirdparty will make a great set of zooms or any decent moderately fast primes at reasonable prices, and this extreme focus on highend market of Fuji and Sony may eventually hurt them seriously.

In order to get more NEW users coming into their systems they really need attractive lowend bodies like improved more rugged version of their X-A3 or A5100. In case of Fuji the cheap but very capable X-T20 may rectify this issue, but still they have very expensive (for those potential consumer body buyers)lens line issue and that must be fixed or they will slowly lose the momentum they've got since the XT2.

Personally, if I have to choose all from scratch again, then I would still choose the Sony system as my main system and maybe m43 to back it up for documentary work done while I am traveling. IMHO, the Olympus EM1MK2 or the Panasonic GH5 or the G85 based m43 system is much better than the Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 based system, at least much more practical with more stabilized lenses and much better flash capability.

So the m43 for action travel and video, the Sony FE for serious tripod work is still the logical choice for me.

 

I think Nikon is the best value system for most of things still, but I just cannot go back to D-SLR main, I feel it really odd whenever I look into the OVF of my D750. It feels really anachronistic and I do not like it at all, I always try hard to like it, though.

I really think Nikon needs a serious mirrorless system that fully utilizes all the current great Nikon F mount lenses at very least the E series lenses, or they will slowly falling into the irrelevant category.

After having owned about 22 Sony cameras in last 11 years or so, I have come to realize I can never fully trust Sony in the long run, and always looking for something else to move to or simply better value system, but I cannot find anything better than my current E mount set up just yet. But the continuously pushing the user base to their higher end products by incessantly replacing or discontinuing products that they do think not high-end enough or highly profitable enough for them eventually hurts them because this strategy will eventually exhaust many of their long time faithful users and at the same time it will scare potential new users away.

  

UPDATE: I interviewed many NORMAL camera buyers in my area at our camera shop and asked them to tell us about what was the main reason they did not buy so-called mirrorless any more, and why they think the market share of these mirrorless decreasing at least in the Western world and the already developed part of Asia such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea , Singapore and HK.

They answered to these questions carefully as we paid some $$ and I think we found out a few interesting things about the NORMAL camera buyers' perception/opinion about ILC cameras and the culture surrounding the camera business:

 

1 to them, if it requires a bag even a tiny one, it's really not important what kind of camera system it is; a mirrorless or a D-SLR, a m43 or a FF, it is just too big and simply too annoying to carry around. So they use their cellphone more even though many of them already have some sort of One cameras or cheap ILCs.

2 To most of NORMAL camera buying people here it really does not matter FF or m43 or APS-C or MF because they are all too difficult to operate and actually really not much different to each other in real life use(at least to them).

This means maybe the small sensor camera systems like the m43 and the Nikon One will all fail since there is no market for them. Not many average camera buyers are interested in ILC systems but fixed lens all around cameras with good one button wireless connection to their phones. And not many the fanatics get interested in these cause most of them are obsessed with the best IQ possible they can get out of a camera system. Thus Olympus, Nikon and Panasonic will definitely need a bigger sensor system to entice them.

3 they do not want a lens like Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art even if it is selling for $50 or less. In fact, any kind of lens interchangeability is not important to them, in fact it is really annoying, and if it is an all around just fixed lens camera like the Sony RX10MK3 , it is actually a better camera system than any type of ILC with a set of primes that most of camera forum denizens want. They should realize they are not the majority of camera buyers and making and selling exactly what they want does not actually help any of these camera makers........

To them a set of great dedicated APS-C primes may be an important part of a good camera system, but to most of NORMAL people it is just not an important or an alluring feature at all.

So as opposed to what Tony , Thom, and many other self-proclaimed experts in many camera forums think, a great set of APS-C dedicated primes will NOT help Nikon or Sony. In fact, outside of the forums most of people actually prefer ZOOMS.

4 To NORMAL people all interchangeable lens cameras are big and quite intimidating.

This means that the very common camera forum trend to get mirrorless for being less conspicuous in the public reason is a silly idea , no one actually cares about if it is a mirroless or a D-SLR, to them all interchangeable lens cameras are annoying and intimidating to most of non-photographers.......so if they really want to be less conspicuous they should try one of the One inch sensor fixed lens cameras.

 

So as I already pointed out, the camera makers should focus on developing fixed multi lenses multi sensored computational cameras with easy one-button wireless connectivity to the phones. The software must be intuitive and 21st century design rather than the current 1980 design, I think it should be user programmable and as Thom points out open the source code to the smart kids and then some of them will develop some good apps for them for free.

Remember why the 5DMK2 and the Panasonic GH2 became such huge hits? Because of the hacked firmwares, I think it is the key.

   

Wild Horses Monument, Vantage WA

Single exposure

(Made Explore #2! - thanks everyone!)

Big thank you to my girlfriend for letting me take her camera out!

 

One of my co-workers saw my Stone Henge star shots and recommended that I check out this place a little further out.

 

This set of horse sculptures is amazing. I spent the whole afternoon, evening and entire night till 4am up at this place and it kept me enthralled the whole time!

 

The poses the artist, David Govedar, formed in the 15 horses makes this installation so dynamic.

 

I saw about 8 shooting stars, 4 sattelites, heard an elk bugle downriver, and the moon decided to visit just as I was leaving. Quite a beautiful night. I didnt' notice the Milky Way above the horses until I was halfway through the exposure and then, I was more concerned about getting some long exposures in than waiting for it to rise and gambling over the coming moon and dawn. I'd like to come back to this place and do some more compositions, but also add some light painting/illumination to the horses.

 

I'm planning on camping out another night, I'd like to head over to Palouse Falls and see the scene that Aaron Reed and Seattle Miles captured so beautifully. The locals rave about the place also.

 

Unfortunately, my camera battery is dead, it died 10 min after my last picture, and I forgot to get the charger on my way out :-( My head wasn't working so well because I also forgot the tripod mount at home :-( :-(, fortunately I had a cheapo garage sale tripod in the car that did the trick. Oi. I can be a dope sometimes.

 

So.... I guess I'll just have to enjoy the experiences tonight with just my eyes! The only recorded moments that may transpire tonight will be my memories. well...and maybe a pic or two from my phone.

     

  

The original ancient Odaiba island shot from Tokyo Rainbow bridge South route.

 

There were about 74 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

Why Fuji will never become mainstream (updated)

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too for something even cheaper and thus more abuse-able camera probably the old A6000. The A6500, the A6300 are not much better than the ancient A6000......at least in terms of sheer IQ.

Any way, since I recently added Fuji system recently, I would like to just compare the lens line of the Fuji X vs the lens line of the Nikon FX vs the lens lineup of the Sony E mount. Many times I find the excessively hard and nasty lens criticism Sony gets from many reviewers and forum experts are extremely unfair, unfounded and dishonest...... And most of times those extreme critics of Sony lens line have actually never used any of expensive Sony or Zeiss FE primes or do not understand how to test lenses correctly.

So here it goes..........

Is Fuji better for lens selection than Sony or Nikon, or is Fuji at least a cheaper system than a FF system like Sony or Nikon?

Well...yes and no. It is not so simple.

Yes, they have APS-C dedicated fast primes that Sony lacks and their zooms are miles ahead compared to Sony APS-C zooms, but then again, the primes Fuji offers are pretty large and heavy, they lack OS and (esp older versions) have clunky and loud AF motors. And Nikon lenses tend to be much cheaper for the same quality or even a bit better optical performance than Fuji or Sony. However, if I can include FF lenses since I only have FF lenses for my Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would have to say Sony FE and Nikon F are much more complete systems than Fuji X. Plus, Nikon FX has really a lot of cheap thirdparty lenses and other cheap thirdparty accessories with incredibly huge selection of used lens market......

So if the native lens selection and the system performance per dollar is any importance to you , then there is still no mirrorless system better than the Nikon or the Canon system......So it's not all roses and sunshine in Mirrorless camp. I have used Sony system for over a decade and I have collected many lenses for my Sony E and A systems and I have a lot of Nikon lenses as well. Now I have been testing many Fuji lenses and they are indeed very good but not as amazing as many many Fuji fanatics in Fujirumor sites suggest they are, especially with respect to value/performance ratio.

 

Comp 1> 23-25mm FL: Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 vs Fuji 23/1.4 vs Fuji 23/2 vs Nikon 24mm f1.8G AF-S vs Sony SEL24mm f1.8Z.

Here I do not want to but I must admit the Nikon is the best lens especially considering its modest price tag and size. Then I prefer the tiny Fuji 23mm f2 WR for bad environment shooting. But if I have to pick the absolute best lens from this set, then I would have to pick the Batis 25 is a bit sharper lens than the the Fuji 23mm f1.4 or the APS-C dedicated Sony Zeiss. The one serious issue of the Batis 25mm f2 is the extremely pronounced CA in highlight or very high contrasty area, other wise, it is a near perfect lens, and I use it very often on my A7R.

The optical performance of the Fuji 23mm f1.4 is nothing short of amazing too but its mechanical quality is not as great as its optical quality.. The Fuji is very well built on paper and according to the fanboys, and renders OOF area or bokeh very very nicely and of course goes down to 1.4........but the AF is loud and just feels awkward, actually it cannot focus well in extreme lowlight where a really fast prime like it is really needed. It has very nice optical quality though...... the fly-by-wire focus ring is also extremely awkward to use in very dark places. Unlike the excellent Zeiss Batis, the Fuji is not weather-sealed and I doubt it is actually well built, to me it feels very cheap...........

The Sony Zeiss is actually a better lens in terms of build and mechanical quality than the Fuji XF23mm f1.4, very well built and very precise focus system and the AF of the Sony Zeiss is light years ahead of the Fuji XF23mm f1.4.

But again considering the price to performance ratio and pure optical quality and over all real life usability or practicality , the Nikon is the best bargain lens here and I mean by far the best bang for your buck kind of a lens not the absolute best -which, in my opinion, is the Batis 25mm f2.

The Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED is smaller and lighter than the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 lens or the Fuji XF23mm f1.4 lens and the Nikon is a lot cheaper than both the Fuji and Zeiss Batis. The Batis lens is very sharp in the center, but in the edges and corners it is still good but not as sharp as the cheap plastic Nikon f2.8G lens..........the green edged CA is annoying and hard to get rid of in PP, and after getting rid of it in PP, the final output becomes very much softer than without the software correction.

And it has incredibly heavy,pronounced distortion before the extremely heavy handed software correction.......that almost all makers mirrorless cameras apply to all their lenses.

So if MF is fine , I actually prefer my Zeiss 25mm f2 Distagon ZF2 lens for this specific focal length. For AF work, I prefer the Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is an exceptional lens at very very modest affordable price.

Comp 2>At 50-55mm range: Sony FE55mm f1.8Z for Sony E mount vs Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Nikon F vs Fuji 56/1.2 for Fuji X vs Loxia 50mm f2 for Sony E.

Yeah I know, f1.2 vs f1.4 vs f1.8 vs f2 not a very fair optical comparison but still this is the most practical way of comparing the systems since not all of these systems have the same class similar optics with the same max F number...and their respective choice of sensor format is also different...........So the Fuji f1.4 lenses just roughly equal to the Nikon and the Sony f1.8 primes in terms of light gathering power and actual DOF-controllability.

I think most likely people use these systems with AF use these lenses and therefore I would like to compare these. Well the Loxia is pure MF lens but I've thrown it into this mix since it is my personal favorite lens for my E mount body and I use it a lot for video and paid corporate portrait work I sometimes do in the summer season(in the winter I am very busy and I have no time for any kind of part time work).

The Fuji is a very fast f1.2 lens but with very slow AF motor, and again it has the terrible fly-by-wire MF ring, and so does the Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 Z lens. This is very annoying, and this is why I do not like the optically fantastic almost flawless(at least for the price) FE55mm f1.8Z.

The Fuji XF56mm f1.2 has amazing color and micro contrast and almost distortion free even before the usual software correction Fuji applies to any of their lenses, it renders beautiful skin tone with very pleasant bokeh.

Probably the Fuji has better copy to copy variation and tighter QC than Sony on their older fake Zeiss line lenses such as this FE55mm f1.8, the FE35mm f1.4Z, the FE35mm f2.8,though Sony has already improved it with the newer FE 50mm f1.4Z, which is objectively a great lens but I personally dislike for its awkward ergonomics and extreme Lo-CA at wideopen and near wideopen range. The FE55mm f1.8Z has significantly pronounced pincushion distortion but it is automatically corrected in the camera or in ACR or in C1 pro, or in DXO pro, however, that auto lens distortion correction makes the lens significantly softer in the edges and corners than it should have originally been without it. So in final images it usually ends up softer than the Fuji or the big FF Sigma lens on a Nikon body. The Loxia 50mm f2 is a lens designed after the legendary Leica mount Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens and its rendering characteristic is very similar to that of the Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens, but the Sony mount version is significantly sharper in the centers with a lot less lateral CA(still more pronounced green CA than the FE 55 or FE 50mm f1.4 Planar, though). And the Loxia is very good at handling complex contra-light scenes, and so it seldom produces terrible rainbow colored ghost...... , the Loxia is very very tactile and easy to MF precisely for video and for stills even including moderately fast moving things or people. So despite of its slightly slower max speed at f2 , I much prefer it to any of the other around 50mm primes for Sony or Fuji, or any of the Nikon 50mm primes.

However, if I can throw the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus lens into the mix, I prefer it to everything else I've compared here. The new Zeiss for Nikon and Canon mount is simply a superb lens with outstanding MF ring, I can MF it easily at f1.4 and get tack sharp images anytime......it's that good. IMHO, the Milvus 50mm f1.4 is the best 50mm prime ever made out side of the real Leica price territory..........the Leica 50mm f2 APO is slightly better I think but I can no longer afford it , I used to have it for a few months but I sold it to my grandpa(needed the money for my new storage system 70 four tera byte hard drives and 24 one tera byte SSDs, etc). I think the Milvus series is really underrated line of Ziess, it is actually as great as their more famous Otus line without the crazy bulk of the Otus series. I know the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otsus series primes are fantastic optically, but they are too impractical in real life scenes(outside of studio and landscape), and therefore, I am not a fan of them.

I love the Milvus line and the older ZF2 line Zeiss primes more than the new Batis or Loxia line Zeiss primes for Sony ,and I am sometimes thinking about going back to Nikon main for that very reason plus better flash and cheaper more practical lens line-up than the Sony FE or Fuji X.

But if you are simply looking for the best bang for your buck kind of a person, then I think there is nothing really beats the Nikon AF-S50mm f1.4G, which is actually a sharp lens if you shoot it at f2.2 or smaller aperture. And if you are like me tend to stop it down to at least f5.6 or so most of times, then the cheap Nikon 50 mm f1.4G is just as sharp as the expensive Loxia 50mm f2 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or Zony 50mm f1.4 Z. But for me the Milvus and the Loxia are both worth the high prices since they have the best MF ring for the Sony bodies, I really hate the fly-by-wire MF system of Zony or Fuji.

And it is obvious that all current tiny bodied mirrorless systems are overpriced and without the super heavy-handed software correction they can not compete well with the best Zeiss or Sigma primes for Nikon Canon mount system, in fact, the cheap Nikon f1.8G series primes beat many of the expensive Zony, Sony GM , Fuji XF lenses in terms of pure optical and mechanical quality, and it is a shocking fact to many.

I think why you may want to pay high premium for Loxia or Batis line if you shoot Sony FE system is that they seem to have very very high QC tolerances and chances are you may never get a bad copy of it at least an extremely bad one.

 

Comp 3> Sony 24-70mm f2.8GM vs Fuji 16-50mm f2.8 XF, Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD.

No comparison here. Sony should be ashamed with their zooms. Although I had a very good 24-70mm f4 and f2.8GM, they were still way behind what the 16-50mm f2.8, let alone the new Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR......The Sony 24-70mm f4 Z is an OK lens for the modest price and compact size, but the 24-70mm f2.8 GM is a super expensive lens, costing about 300 hundreds more than the Nikon version and still optically not as good as the Nikon, or in fact I believe it is even a bit worse than the Tamron version for Nikon F mount.

In fact, lack of any quality zoom in the bread and butter range for event pros or part time paid photographers in the current Sony lens line up is a big minus point of Sony system regardless of the mirror type...........SLT or mirrorless.

And another issue is no Tamron, Sigma support for Sony E and A mount any more, this is a huge drawback of the system...........to say the least. If there was a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for Sony E mount, I would have bought it and replaced my Nikon mount version of it for my A7R and Nikon D750. It is very pathetic sad that we Sony users are always forced to get the overpriced GM or Batis line lenses even for the focal range where we might want to just get a "good enough" cheap off-brand lens option.

And in fact , in many cases I actually prefer Tamron lenses to Sony or Zeiss E mount lenses even without any discount or like that.

If I had the Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC option for my Sony system, then I wouldn't have bought a few copies of the Batis E 85mm f1.8 OSS and the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM and returned most of these. I simply prefer the Tamron to the Zeiss or Sony regardless of their prices or brand names in this case. The Tamorn 85mm f1.8,35mm f1.8VC, 45mm f1.8 VC, etc, are really great lenses and many times I've considered going back to Nikon main just for these modestly priced but high quality Tamron primes.

 

I think the Sony E16-70mm f4 (recent copies)are quite good, but still no where near the best APS-C zoom Fuji or Nikon makes for their respective APS-C system.........But in this case the Sony lens is at least very versatile and small unlike their FF zooms..........they are pure bogs, especially the 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm f2.8 GM....

 

Comp 4>Sony FE70-200mm f4 OSS, Nikon AF-S70-200mmf4GEDVR, Fuji XF55-200mm f4-5.6ED.

Well, in this comparison, I must say the Sony FE70-200mm f4G, at least the recent copy(made after 2015),is the best in the set. The Sony is cheaper and sharper and comes with tripod collar. The initial 3000 or so copies had the soft 200mm f4 setting issue, but the copies produced after 2015 July are much better, if you read the recent review on the Sony FE70-200mmf4 G at Ephotozine, you see it clearly, it is raved there, and they are usually an anti-Sony, pro Nikon site.

In Japan, the Sony FE70-200mm f4 G SSM lens is one of the biggest bargain lenses, and now Sony is giving a free Zeiss branded Protection filter for any one buys this lens.

So for me, in this range it is a no brainer. It is relatively compact, sharp throughout the range, with very well corrected almost flat field at most of focal range, it is a very very good zoom at very very reasonable price point.

The Nikon AF-S70-200mm f4G ED VR lens was a good lens when it was out. But now it seems really dated and overpriced. It is heavier than the Sony by about 205g, it is a bit longer than the Sony and much bigger and heavier than the relatively small(albeit darker)Fuji. The Nikon is less sharp at 70mm mark than the Sony at all aperture settings, with a bit more pronounced barrel distortion than that of the Sony. At 135mm setting, the Sony is still a bit sharper and better corrected. At 200mm f4, the Nikon might still be a bit sharper at 200mm f4 setting but not by much, the later recently released copies of the Sony is much better than the initially released copies that tested by most of so-called review sites, so you may see it seems much worse than it actually is at 200mm f4 setting at most of review sites, but it has really improved since 2015.

Compared to the cheap but dark Fuji zoom, the Fuji is overrated lens, obviously.

It is not the same class of the zoom as either the Nikon or the Sony 70-200mm f4 zoom. Claiming the XF55-200 dim zoom as good as the Sony FE 70-200mm f4 G is a bit of stretch. IMHO, the Fuji 55-200 is a bit fancier version of a typical kit zoom, that is all about it.

 

Comp 5> around 50mm macro lens: Sony FE 50mm f2.8 macro, Nikon AF-S60mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, Fuji 60mm f1.2 almost macro lens, Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG.

Well there is no need any serious analysis or reading at all about these lenses, I used to have all of these and I only kept the Sony.

The Sony FE 50mm f2.8 Macro is a fantastic lens especially for the modest price tag it carries. After all, it is the third very sharpest prime ever tested on the a7R2 and a7R.

It beats the about 100 US more expensive Nikon 60 G micro hands down, albeit the compromised slow AF, but in macro range no one use AF anyway.

For pure optical quality it is a absolute steal, it has very low CA, thanks to the amazing new ED element, it has very very low distortion, and it produces cool color(not as warm as Zeiss or G branded Sony lenses) and I prefer that personally, but many people especially those who love flowers or people head shots may prefer a bit warmer OOC color.

The Fuji 60mm f2.4 is an excellent lens too but it is not a REAL macro, it is only a half macro kind like the Canon EF24-70mm f4 L IS in macro mode.

So if you need the real macro capability in mirrorless system there is no other choice than the Sony or you must go down to m43 league, and I say go down but as for macro m43 system is not actually worse than FF or especially APS-C system unless you have super expensive macro lens plus macro ring flash and always 100 percent use a tripod.

The m43 allows you to focus stack automatically for better DOF, and it has excellent but reasonably priced compact macro lens choices such as the amazing Olympus 60mm f2.8, the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Leica branded lens, the Olympus and Panasonic 30mm f2.8 macro. And Panasonic will release long awaited X120mm f2.8 G macro lens very soon.

So for me and I think many casual macro shooters the m43 is the most interesting choice for macro work or just simple casual floower close up.

I love Sony 30mm f3.5 on my A6500 too, it is a cheap lens but very practical, you can really abuse it in rain, in cold mountains, etc, and it never breaks. Even if it breaks, hey who cares? it is very cheap indeed. But if you like shooting food or some product like some Star Wars figures or Mickey Mouse doll like I do, then the Sony FE50mm f2.8 macro is an excellent choice especially on the R bodies.

The cheap Sony macro is a bit less sharp than the amazingly sharp FE55mm f1.8Z on the A7R2, but it is just as sharp as the Sonnar on the A7R or the a7M2. And in my test comfortably beats the Loxia 50mm f2 in the center and especially in the edges, albeit a bit more pronounced Lo-CA in highlight or OOF area. In any case, the Sony FE50mm f2.8 is a real bargain deal lens in the current FE system, and this lens and the FE90mm f2.8G prove that actually there are many bargain deal lenses in the current harshly criticized as expensive or overpriced(mostly by non-Sony users) Sony lens system.

Comp 6> around 100mm macro lens: Sony FE90mm f2.8G, Tamron 90 mm f2.8 VC G2, Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, etc.

Well there is really no comp here, the Sony FE 90mm wins hands down as DXO and others all confirm it firmly. I had all of these plus the famous Voiklander 125mm f2.5 APO macro, and the FE 90mm f2.8 G is the absolute winner here, of course the Voiktlander is also a great lens but it is not as practical as the Sony in real life use.

The Sony lens also beats both the Zeiss 100 mm f2 ZF2 and the Milvus version in resolution, CA, distortion, and light fall off, so it is an outstanding lens without any doubt.

The lens really shines on the a7R2, but it is really good on any body but if your sensor is just 24mp FF , then it easily outresolves the low resolution sensor. It actually even outresolves the 42mp sensor. It is that good with respect to sheer resolution and measurable so-called objective IQ.

However, it is not really easy to use in real life since it is big and not balances well on any of Sony A7X body, let alone on any of A6XXX body. I think Sony really needs a bit bigger body for this type of truly outstanding optics that're clearly designed to resolve the next generation high resolution FF. Many internet review sites talk about the latest sensors out-resolving the lenses very often as the biggest issue of the high resolution FF camera system, but it is a big myth or even lie, it is better to have a sensor easily out-resolves any lens you can put on it because it really eliminates all sorts of bad sensor artifacts issues.

 

Body wise, I can only repeat what I said before. The last APS-C body I personally bought with my own money was the Sony A6500 and it feels good in my hands and it has great quality RAW file but terrible jpg's just like all the other Sony cameras. The shutter sounds very cheap with helplessly bad shutter shock, the rolling shutter in Electronic shutter mode is very bad and it gets even worse in video mode. But I never have the infamous heat issue with my A6500 in stills mode, just in video mode. My A6300 has terrible heat issue both in stills and in motion modes. I do not really have any issue with Sony menu system any more but I am already extremely used to it by using almost every single Sony AXXX and A7X camera........the short battery life issue is already solved since I have special USB charger for my mirrorless cameras and I have already collected 12 Sony batteries since the first NEX5. And to be fair to Sony, no other company mirrorless system has better battery life than these Sony cameras. So over all despite of the flawed mount design and questionable mechanical quality with terribly slow general operation speed of these cameras, I think Sony E mount system seems like still the best cost effective choice in the current mirrorless world with respect to simple body usability aspect of camera system, especially if you do not mind using fullframe lenses on an APS-C body.

The X-T2 is built like a tank but quite a bit heavier in the hand than the A6300 but not much heavier than the new A6500, which I also own and think also built like a tank.

The A7R2 is even heavier than the Fuji, albeit the lower quality body material used and poor body sealing quality. The Fuji is a much faster camera in the real world use, it shoots much faster than the A6300, the A7R2 or the A7M2 but the A6500 is even faster than the XT2 with a much longer lasting big buffer. However, the A6500 does not have any sort of external grip option that might have helped the balance of the system when a long tele photo lens is mounted on the camera, so the real life usability of the Fuji with a big AF lens is better than that of the A6500. The A6500 and the A6300 have very fast single shot AF and decent C AF in good light, so they should have had an external grip option for better balance with a big tele photo lens for action shooting.

The eye-detect AF and faceAF on the Fuji is just OK compared to the Sony's, but it is the only one aspect of AF performance where the Sony APS-C beats the Fuji XT2 or X-Pro2. But I am sure none of the current APS-C and FF mirrorless are as good as the upcoming GH5(that I've already pre-ordered and consider as a game-changer) with respect to AF performance and in general operation speed.

The Panasonic has the best AF in mirrorless world but even that is not even close to the decent Canon or Nikon D-SLR for action tracking. The D500 still blows anything from Sony, Fuji, Olympus out of the water and the AF performance gap in real lowlight between the best mirrorless and the mid level D-SLRs such as the D7200 and 80D is not getting smaller but bigger, IMHO, especially when a big telephoto lens is mounted on them. Mirrorless lowlight AF is actually not getting any better except with Panasonic system, this is a real shame. But all other areas of AF performance the Panasonic GH5 and the G85 are both better than any D-SLR, period. These two Panaosnics can focus down to minus 4EV without any issue, any D-SLR or other brand mirrorless cameras cannot even touch it with respect to extreme lowlight AF accuracy......The Sony A7MK2 on paper can focus down to the same level of lowlight minus 4EV, but in real life the Panasonic is a lot better in these extreme lowlight scenes.

The Jpeg quality of the Fuji is quite amazing and sometimes saves a lot of time, so I kind of appreciate that. But the Fuji XT2 or XP2, or even much cheaper new XT20 still have the infamous dust issue as with the Sony A7X and A6XXX........and this is the real reason I can never shoot my Sony or Fuji in Jpeg mode, I always need to remove about 46 dustspots in the sky whenever I use my XT2, A6300, A7M2, A7R2, or A6500, they really have severe dust issue and the worst of all the sensor of the A6500, the A7R2 and the A7M2 is very very difficult to clean safely without sending them in for Sony service center. The sensor of the Fuji's and the older Sony are at least much easier to clean without damaging the sensor or IBIS. I think the really effective automatic dust reduction system of the m43 is really underrated, and it is, I consider, one of these most effective real life weapons of the m43 system that Olympus and Panasonic might be able to effectively use against the others in their marketing or educational materials.

This is the main reason why I sold my A7X2 series cameras and kept my A6300/A6500 and A7R.

As for Fuji UI and controls initially I liked it and I was finding my way around the camera very easily and the Q menu of the Fuji system much easier and more logical to use than any Sony menu system, there is no comparison in this department and I think Sony should focus on this area and also the over all usability with increased operation speed of the camera "system". However, I quickly found out the amazing controls and UI of Fuji that all Fuji fanatics in Fuji rumor sites rave about is kind of working against me or many non retro prime shooters around me. I really hate the retro style bodies and controls inherited or borrowed from film era "my granpa generation", who was one of those anti-Vietnam war hipsters wearing crazy bell bottom jeans and flare shirts.

For me the film era UI and controls are very very difficult to use and very much stressful on my peace of mind. When I was shooting the XT2 there were times I literally felt wanting to throw it onto my grandpa's concrete car garage.....using it for a long period of time every day was that frustrating.

 

I think both the Fuji and the Sony system have serious lens issues; there is no thirdparty lens support other than obscure manual prime options from cheap obscure names. Zeiss makes a great set of primes for Sony and a couple for Fuji, but they are all primes.....

I think they need more great zooms than primes to become true rivals to Canon and Nikon system for really budget minded average camera buyers. I think they really need to persuade Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang to re-enter into the system.

Lack of any decent quality zoom in the so-called bread and butter focal range for the Sony or the Fuji mount system is a huge issue for many. There are no decent quality zooms in 100-400 range or 24-70mm FF equivalent range...........even if you accept to pay 2k for each zoom range. And in case of Sony, their 70-200mm f2.8GM OSS is a expensive but horrible lens with really bad quality control and copy to copy variation to date...

I have tested three copies of that lens and all of these 3 were terribly de-centered.

They all have terrible anti-flare coating and they all produced terrible green or magenta/ orange rainbow colored ghost and spot flare......and the distortion at the 70mm mark on this lens was simply monstorus, very very difficult to correct in PP. At the 200mm mark on this lens it gets even worse, the pinchusioning type of distortion at the 200mm mark on this lens is even harder to correct than the barrel type distortion at the 70mm mark.

If you are a pure prime shooter, then you might love the current great FE prime lineup and XF prime lineup, but for a mostly zoom shooter or for a documentary type of work that really requires a great mid range zoom, the Sony E system and the Fuji X system are both not great. Especially not great for those events where you do not want to change lenses over and over due to the dust issue or due to your shooting objects move fast, or you cannot simply zoom with your feet.

So while I think the Sony and the Fuji systems are really good for studio or landscape or location work where you can safely change lenses all the time and allowed to work on a tripod at very slow pace. But for any thing requires speed or a set of great 24-70 or 70-200 and 100-400 kind of zooms , they are just a pure joke, simply useless systems.

And for that type of works the DSLRs are much cheaper and much more trusted tools due to the much faster general operation speed, much better zoom lineup, much better third party lens support, much more reliable flash system,etc.

All that said both the Fuji and the Sony system are already very good for most of normal use cases and getting better and better every iteration, so I am quite positive about their short term future success.....but not very sure in the longer run............especially considering the fact Nikon and Canon will get more serious about their mirrorless offerings very soon.

And in case of Canon they are already no2 in mirrorless market only second to Olympus in total unit sales, and only second to Sony in market share by value.

I think if the Sony FE system and Fuji X system will not sell very well, or will not better the all Canon Nikon D-SLRs in unit based market share, no thirdparty will make a great set of zooms or any decent moderately fast primes at reasonable prices, and this extreme focus on highend market of Fuji and Sony may eventually hurt them seriously.

In order to get more NEW users coming into their systems they really need attractive lowend bodies like improved more rugged version of their X-A3 or A5100. In case of Fuji the cheap but very capable X-T20 may rectify this issue, but still they have very expensive (for those potential consumer body buyers)lens line issue and that must be fixed or they will slowly lose the momentum they've got since the XT2.

Personally, if I have to choose all from scratch again, then I would still choose the Sony system as my main system and maybe m43 to back it up for documentary work done while I am traveling. IMHO, the Olympus EM1MK2 or the Panasonic GH5 or the G85 based m43 system is much better than the Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 based system, at least much more practical with more stabilized lenses and much better flash capability.

So the m43 for action travel and video, the Sony FE for serious tripod work is still the logical choice for me.

 

I think Nikon is the best value system for most of things still, but I just cannot go back to D-SLR main, I feel it really odd whenever I look into the OVF of my D750. It feels really anachronistic and I do not like it at all, I always try hard to like it, though.

I really think Nikon needs a serious mirrorless system that fully utilizes all the current great Nikon F mount lenses at very least the E series lenses, or they will slowly falling into the irrelevant category.

After having owned about 22 Sony cameras in last 11 years or so, I have come to realize I can never fully trust Sony in the long run, and always looking for something else to move to or simply better value system, but I cannot find anything better than my current E mount set up just yet. But the continuously pushing the user base to their higher end products by incessantly replacing or discontinuing products that they do think not high-end enough or highly profitable enough for them eventually hurts them because this strategy will eventually exhaust many of their long time faithful users and at the same time it will scare potential new users away.

  

UPDATE: I interviewed many NORMAL camera buyers in my area at our camera shop and asked them to tell us about what was the main reason they did not buy so-called mirrorless any more, and why they think the market share of these mirrorless decreasing at least in the Western world and the already developed part of Asia such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea , Singapore and HK.

They answered to these questions carefully as we paid some $$ and I think we found out a few interesting things about the NORMAL camera buyers' perception/opinion about ILC cameras and the culture surrounding the camera business:

 

1 to them, if it requires a bag even a tiny one, it's really not important what kind of camera system it is; a mirrorless or a D-SLR, a m43 or a FF, it is just too big and simply too annoying to carry around. So they use their cellphone more even though many of them already have some sort of One cameras or cheap ILCs.

2 To most of NORMAL camera buying people here it really does not matter FF or m43 or APS-C or MF because they are all too difficult to operate and actually really not much different to each other in real life use(at least to them).

This means maybe the small sensor camera systems like the m43 and the Nikon One will all fail since there is no market for them. Not many average camera buyers are interested in ILC systems but fixed lens all around cameras with good one button wireless connection to their phones. And not many the fanatics get interested in these cause most of them are obsessed with the best IQ possible they can get out of a camera system. Thus Olympus, Nikon and Panasonic will definitely need a bigger sensor system to entice them.

3 they do not want a lens like Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art even if it is selling for $50 or less. In fact, any kind of lens interchangeability is not important to them, in fact it is really annoying, and if it is an all around just fixed lens camera like the Sony RX10MK3 , it is actually a better camera system than any type of ILC with a set of primes that most of camera forum denizens want. They should realize they are not the majority of camera buyers and making and selling exactly what they want does not actually help any of these camera makers........

To them a set of great dedicated APS-C primes may be an important part of a good camera system, but to most of NORMAL people it is just not an important or an alluring feature at all.

So as opposed to what Tony , Thom, and many other self-proclaimed experts in many camera forums think, a great set of APS-C dedicated primes will NOT help Nikon or Sony. In fact, outside of the forums most of people actually prefer ZOOMS.

4 To NORMAL people all interchangeable lens cameras are big and quite intimidating.

This means that the very common camera forum trend to get mirrorless for being less conspicuous in the public reason is a silly idea , no one actually cares about if it is a mirroless or a D-SLR, to them all interchangeable lens cameras are annoying and intimidating to most of non-photographers.......so if they really want to be less conspicuous they should try one of the One inch sensor fixed lens cameras.

 

So as I already pointed out, the camera makers should focus on developing fixed multi lenses multi sensored computational cameras with easy one-button wireless connectivity to the phones. The software must be intuitive and 21st century design rather than the current 1980 design, I think it should be user programmable and as Thom points out open the source code to the smart kids and then some of them will develop some good apps for them for free.

Remember why the 5DMK2 and the Panasonic GH2 became such huge hits? Because of the hacked firmwares, I think it is the key.

  

UPDATE2:The last two weeks or so, I have been testing my Batis 85mm f1.8 (I have 2 copies of it and I have access to 6 extra copies of it at my shop) vs the new Sony FE85mm f1.8.

And surprisingly enough I found the Sony cheap lens actually quite a bit sharper at f1.8 and probably throughout all f stops.

The bokeh or out of focus area rendition of the Batis seems to be a bit smoother, it has a bit less lateral CA, but it seems to be softer, actually obviously so. It is not a copy issue since I have also tested 6 extra Batis we have at our store.

Another big con of the Batis vs the Sony FE 85mm f1.8 is that the Batis has noticeably more pincushion distortion , if you turn off the in camera lens correction, you will see it in the EVF of any Sony A7X camera.

The color tone is also different, the Batis produces a bit warmer color than the Sony and many say they prefer the look of Zeiss, but honestly if you objectively blind test it you will soon realize the Sony renders everything more naturally with a bit more neutral tone. Many Zeiss fanboys just say it is a Zeiss, so it is a special lens, well really? Not all Zeiss lenses are great, only a very few Zeiss are actually great, and these days everything is designed with computer with using the same software, so every lens in the same size range is actually identically sharp, no dramatic difference there, really..

The Tamron 85mm f1.8VC, the Batis 85mm f1.8E, the Sony FE85mm f1.8, are all similarly sharp wide open, and from f2.8 the Sony is noticeably better than the Batis and the Tamron.

I also prefer the cooler out of the camera color of the Sony lens over the Tamron and the Zeiss Batis.

Now, we all know that Zeiss is not a better lens designer than Sony or Tamron , or any one..........maybe this fact is really hard for the fanboys to admit, but it is the reality.

IMHO, the only one minor drawback of the new Sony FE85mm f1.8 is the a bit harsh out of focus area rendition in strong back lit scene, and I think almost all Sony FE lenses share this issue.

The AF of the FE85mm f1.8 is much faster than the AF of the Batis 85mm f1.8E, so for shooting my cats indoor, I think the Sony is a much better lens. For weddings, I think the Batis may be a bit better since it renders our of focus area a bit smoother in extreme back lit scene. However, I do not like the warmer color signature of the Batis and many Japanese Zeiss lenses. I suspect the actual lens designer for the Batis series is Tamron, and therefore they share very similar look to the Tamron 85mm f1.8VC. I may be wrong here but I think I am right since the look Batis series lenses share is quite different from my MF Zeiss lenses including my Loxia lenses and ZF ZE lenses.

It is sad but I have to admit that almost all Zeiss Batis and Loxia lenses are just ok , nothing really special about these, except the 25mm, which is my favorite lens, and Loxia 21mm f2.8 and may be also the 50mm f2 Loxia.

The 18mm f3.5 Batis is a poorly designed lens, really should not carry the Zeiss blue badge. The Batis 85mm f1.8E was a great lens, at least I thought so until I compared it to the new cheap Sony 85mm f1.8, but now it is the softest 85mm in the current Sony E mount lens line up. The FE85mm f1.8, the Tamorn 85mm f1.8VC, the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art, the Sony 85mm f1.4GM are all sharper than the overpriced plastic coated bulky Batis 85m f1.8.

I am selling the Batis and get the Sony FE50mm f1.4 soon to replace my Loxia 50mm f2 and Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8.

 

But the most important change that this very humble Sony FE85mm f1.8 has induced in this industry is that it has kind of killed all charms of them43 system and the Fuji X.

The Fuji 56 f1.2 and the m43 fake Leica 42.5 mm f1.2 lens are great optically, but as a whole system, they are a much less capable system than a cheap Sony lens on a FF body.

  

UPDATE3: Recently, I decided to sell some of my Sony, Nikon, and Fuji gear and the results were really surprising.

 

I sold a couple of Fuji X-T2, a Sony A6500, a A6300, a A7R, a A7R2, three A7MK2. I also sold my Nikon D800E, D750, and D810.

 

The most expensive camera by far of the list was the A7R2, but surprisingly I got about identical amount of money for it to what I got for my much cheaper(as a brand new) D810. I paid about 3200 USD for my A7R2 in 2015 and shockingly it was devalued a lot more than I thought, I could only get about 1750 USD for it.

I must say it was a terrible loss.

I paid around 2000 US for my D810 in 2016, and got back about 1800 US for it in May 2017.

 

I got about 123000 yen for my X-T2, and I must say the resell value of this camera is great, I think Fuji has been controlling the price of this camera quite well. I just lost about 5000 yen on this camera and I have used it for more than 7 months, so it was a great deal. Renting it over 5 months and paid only 45 US or less, is an amazing deal.

 

I got offered only 72000 for my A7R and it was really pity, so I did not sell it.

 

I got only 64000 yen for my A6300, but I expected this so it was not really shocking, still it was a bad value camera, though. But it was replaced by the A6500, so I did not expect too much for this one.......

 

I got about 75000 yen for my A6500 and it was quite shocking, I expected to get more for that since I paid 118000 yen for it in last Oct.

 

I got 95000 yen for my A7MK2, it was quite sad, deplorable since it is a FF and cheaper than the X-T2 in the used camera market here.

I got about 134000 yen for my 2 year old D750, and it was a positive surprise. I did not expect to get this much of money for it since I paid only about 158000 yen for it in 2014.

 

So I realized Sony cameras seem to hold the worst resell value (by far) in Japan and my Thai friend told me in Thailand too.

I was about to sell my second A7R2, but I decided to keep it just for my FE16-35mm f4 and Voiklander 15mm f4.5 and Sony 85mm f1.8...

 

But the shocking loss by far this time was the Batis 85mm f1.8 or the Batis 18mm f2.8, I have lost a lot of money on those 2 lenses, and I did not expect this.....I thought I might get about 900 US for my Batis 85, but I got only about 630 US for it.

The 18mm Batis was even worse, I paid about 168000 yen for it in 2016..... and now I could get only about 98000 yen for it, it was the most shocking and the biggest loss by far, I never thought the resale value of the Batis 18mm f2.8 this bad.

  

So now I decided never buy any more Batis series lenses, I have lost too much on this terribly built so-called Zeiss(actually Tamron made) lenses.

  

UPDATE4: I am now in the process of replacing all my Sony E mount lenses(except a few) with Canon EF mount lenses.

I hated adapters, but after I tried the Sigma MC11, I changed my mind and I think it is much safer to use my Sony bodies with Canon lenses since Canon EF mount is the safest long term future proven mount, and the resell value of the super expensive Sony GM and so-called Sony Zeiss are too bad, the Batis line is even worse. So I think by selling off all expensive Sony E mount lenses that cannot be reused in any other mount system in the near future, I will be more secured and adding the Sigma adapter expand the possible AF lens selection for my FE bodies. After all, I realized that Sony FE zooms are all mediocre , even the most expensive GM ones.

 

I will replace my FE16-35mm f4 Z with a Canon EF16-35mm f4 L IS, I have compared ten copies of each and I am 100 percent sure the Canon is the better lens and cheaper one. In fact, the adapter plus the lens price is the same as the Sony FE16-35mm f4 Z alone. And another benefit of this lens over the FE16-35mm f4 Z is that the Canon lens does not extend its length when it zooms out or in.

 

I will also replace the FE24-70mm f4 with the EF24-70mm f4 LIS.

I will get the 40mm f2.8 STM, which is a surprisingly good lens for the modest size and price.

 

I will also add Sigma 135mm f1.8 Art, which is the sharpest lens ever produced by any one according to Photozone,de.

 

I also add Canon EF70-300mm f4-5.6IS MK2 lens, which is really cheap and for me it is a worth lens since I am not a serious telephoto shooter and so I do not want to invest over 100000 yen for a lens like FE70-300mm f4-5.6G, which is clearly overpriced.

 

I also add Tamron 35mm f1.8VC to replace my Sony FE 35mm f2.8 and Loxia 35mm f2, both of which I actually detest for the terrible corner quality and terrible coma(in case of the Loxia).

 

I may also add the amazing Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC G2, which is about half the price of the Sony FE70-200mmf2.8GM, and in my experience, the Tamron is the sharper lens(I compared 4 copies of each once at my shop).

 

I will keep my FE85mm f1.8, which is one of the best 85mm primes ever made and I much prefer this to the overpriced oversized GM and my plastic coated cheap looking Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8E lens.

 

I will also keep my Voiktlander 15mm f4.5 and 12mm f5.6.

  

UPDATE5: Many people including myself thought Nikon is dying, if not already dead by now, but in reality Nikon still sells many many more units than Sony and Nikon is now working on new type of sensor design and they may collaborate with Pentax and Olympus to set up a new sensor company. If this plays out well, then Sony will be the loser since they will have no one to sell their so-called Fullframe sensors any more. And as a result their highend camera prices will go up significantly.

And now Sony has just announced they've just decided to spin off their digital-imaging division(Sony DI) and now it is an independent business under Sony corp's supervision, just like their sensor group.....

This means now Sony imaging is not a part of Sony but their subsidiary, and therefore, to Sony device group, the imaging group is just a customer,nothing special, in fact,considering its size of market share in relation to that of Nikon, Sony imaging group is a lower class customer to the device group.

So there is no more reason for Sony device technology to keep the best sensor for in-house use-only. In fact now Sony device tech must compete with the new sensor company Nikon Olympus Ricoh have just established here and some European sensor designers such as CMOSIS, who makes the Leica SL sensor and M sensor.

And do not forget there is always Canon if Sony does not sell anything to Nikon.........Canon will start selling it and there will be Panasonic and Tower Jazz also........so Nikon will not have any problem choosing sensor suppliers any more.

Sony must sell their best sensors to Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax , or Sony will lose them, Sony cannot choose customers any more.

If Sony is smart, it will not compete with Nikon or Olympus in camera market. After all, Nikon is the biggest customer of Sony.....and Sony also buys steppers from Nikon anyway. So Sony is not dominating the sensor market, or controlling Nikon as many armchair experts in many camera fora think..........and the just announced Spun-off of their imaging division makes Sony camera business less trust-worthy........... Sony thinks every business as a short term investment and runs it to make it temporarily profitable and then spins it off.

After that? of course sells it to anyone willing to buy it.........like Sony did with the Vaio PC business, TV business, etc,etc.

That is why no one really trust Sony in the long run, we long term Sony users just use its cameras but always know it is a back-up plan or step-gap solution......

After all no serious camera buyers are as obtuse as many spec-chasers and review sites think they are. No one buys into a big expensive camera system just for an amazing set of features in a body or two...................there are many many more important aspects to a system camera than just a set of great features... I think Sony should try to be an Intel of camera.

 

UPDATE6:I attended a few academic conferences in Osaka, Kobe and Kyoto. And I visited many many very crowded tourists venues there and I have come to realize the death of real camera thing is nothing but extremely exaggerated by those silly clickbait sites. There were many many people still using a REAL ILC camera along with their smartphones.

Then what is the problem I've found there?

Well there were a very few people using so-called mirrorless there , especially the high-end mirrorless cameras like theA7R/A7R2,theA7M2, the X-T2, the X-P2, etc. I saw many m43 cameras even the EM1MK2 and GH5, I also spotted many people with XT20, A6300, etc, but I never spotted any A7R2, A7M2, XT2,etc......even at the most crowded tourist places like Kinkaku-ji temple, Kobe Great earthquake museum, Kiyomizudera temple, etc.

And that makes me worry about the long term future of so-called Mirrorless, if Sony and Fuji actually going under before Nikon?

 

To be honest, there are many many Nikon shooters and of course Canon guys and girls, but no A7 or XT2 guys at all.

 

In my last academic conferences in Tokyo area, I found it the same, and in Bangkok and Korea I did not see any Fuji or Sony high-end mirrorless bodies at all.

And more worrying fact was that there were so many Chinese tourists there with big cameras, but none of them shooting a Sony or a Fuji, that makes me really nervous about the future of Sony.

 

Sony is investing a lot of money very quick into the FE system but the ship seems to be sinking. I think the stupid shill marketing and silly "mirrorless taking over the entire industry "hype generated by Fuji and Sony paid internet sites is not at all working for them , but maybe working against them.

  

The temporal D800 success in the camera forums made Nikon this stupid!

   

  

The original ancient Odaiba island shot from Tokyo Rainbow bridge South route.

 

There were about 74 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

Why Fuji will never become mainstream (updated)

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too for something even cheaper and thus more abuse-able camera probably the old A6000. The A6500, the A6300 are not much better than the ancient A6000......at least in terms of sheer IQ.

Any way, since I recently added Fuji system recently, I would like to just compare the lens line of the Fuji X vs the lens line of the Nikon FX vs the lens lineup of the Sony E mount. Many times I find the excessively hard and nasty lens criticism Sony gets from many reviewers and forum experts are extremely unfair, unfounded and dishonest...... And most of times those extreme critics of Sony lens line have actually never used any of expensive Sony or Zeiss FE primes or do not understand how to test lenses correctly.

So here it goes..........

Is Fuji better for lens selection than Sony or Nikon, or is Fuji at least a cheaper system than a FF system like Sony or Nikon?

Well...yes and no. It is not so simple.

Yes, they have APS-C dedicated fast primes that Sony lacks and their zooms are miles ahead compared to Sony APS-C zooms, but then again, the primes Fuji offers are pretty large and heavy, they lack OS and (esp older versions) have clunky and loud AF motors. And Nikon lenses tend to be much cheaper for the same quality or even a bit better optical performance than Fuji or Sony. However, if I can include FF lenses since I only have FF lenses for my Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would have to say Sony FE and Nikon F are much more complete systems than Fuji X. Plus, Nikon FX has really a lot of cheap thirdparty lenses and other cheap thirdparty accessories with incredibly huge selection of used lens market......

So if the native lens selection and the system performance per dollar is any importance to you , then there is still no mirrorless system better than the Nikon or the Canon system......So it's not all roses and sunshine in Mirrorless camp. I have used Sony system for over a decade and I have collected many lenses for my Sony E and A systems and I have a lot of Nikon lenses as well. Now I have been testing many Fuji lenses and they are indeed very good but not as amazing as many many Fuji fanatics in Fujirumor sites suggest they are, especially with respect to value/performance ratio.

 

Comp 1> 23-25mm FL: Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 vs Fuji 23/1.4 vs Fuji 23/2 vs Nikon 24mm f1.8G AF-S vs Sony SEL24mm f1.8Z.

Here I do not want to but I must admit the Nikon is the best lens especially considering its modest price tag and size. Then I prefer the tiny Fuji 23mm f2 WR for bad environment shooting. But if I have to pick the absolute best lens from this set, then I would have to pick the Batis 25 is a bit sharper lens than the the Fuji 23mm f1.4 or the APS-C dedicated Sony Zeiss. The one serious issue of the Batis 25mm f2 is the extremely pronounced CA in highlight or very high contrasty area, other wise, it is a near perfect lens, and I use it very often on my A7R.

The optical performance of the Fuji 23mm f1.4 is nothing short of amazing too but its mechanical quality is not as great as its optical quality.. The Fuji is very well built on paper and according to the fanboys, and renders OOF area or bokeh very very nicely and of course goes down to 1.4........but the AF is loud and just feels awkward, actually it cannot focus well in extreme lowlight where a really fast prime like it is really needed. It has very nice optical quality though...... the fly-by-wire focus ring is also extremely awkward to use in very dark places. Unlike the excellent Zeiss Batis, the Fuji is not weather-sealed and I doubt it is actually well built, to me it feels very cheap...........

The Sony Zeiss is actually a better lens in terms of build and mechanical quality than the Fuji XF23mm f1.4, very well built and very precise focus system and the AF of the Sony Zeiss is light years ahead of the Fuji XF23mm f1.4.

But again considering the price to performance ratio and pure optical quality and over all real life usability or practicality , the Nikon is the best bargain lens here and I mean by far the best bang for your buck kind of a lens not the absolute best -which, in my opinion, is the Batis 25mm f2.

The Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED is smaller and lighter than the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 lens or the Fuji XF23mm f1.4 lens and the Nikon is a lot cheaper than both the Fuji and Zeiss Batis. The Batis lens is very sharp in the center, but in the edges and corners it is still good but not as sharp as the cheap plastic Nikon f2.8G lens..........the green edged CA is annoying and hard to get rid of in PP, and after getting rid of it in PP, the final output becomes very much softer than without the software correction.

And it has incredibly heavy,pronounced distortion before the extremely heavy handed software correction.......that almost all makers mirrorless cameras apply to all their lenses.

So if MF is fine , I actually prefer my Zeiss 25mm f2 Distagon ZF2 lens for this specific focal length. For AF work, I prefer the Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is an exceptional lens at very very modest affordable price.

Comp 2>At 50-55mm range: Sony FE55mm f1.8Z for Sony E mount vs Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Nikon F vs Fuji 56/1.2 for Fuji X vs Loxia 50mm f2 for Sony E.

Yeah I know, f1.2 vs f1.4 vs f1.8 vs f2 not a very fair optical comparison but still this is the most practical way of comparing the systems since not all of these systems have the same class similar optics with the same max F number...and their respective choice of sensor format is also different...........So the Fuji f1.4 lenses just roughly equal to the Nikon and the Sony f1.8 primes in terms of light gathering power and actual DOF-controllability.

I think most likely people use these systems with AF use these lenses and therefore I would like to compare these. Well the Loxia is pure MF lens but I've thrown it into this mix since it is my personal favorite lens for my E mount body and I use it a lot for video and paid corporate portrait work I sometimes do in the summer season(in the winter I am very busy and I have no time for any kind of part time work).

The Fuji is a very fast f1.2 lens but with very slow AF motor, and again it has the terrible fly-by-wire MF ring, and so does the Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 Z lens. This is very annoying, and this is why I do not like the optically fantastic almost flawless(at least for the price) FE55mm f1.8Z.

The Fuji XF56mm f1.2 has amazing color and micro contrast and almost distortion free even before the usual software correction Fuji applies to any of their lenses, it renders beautiful skin tone with very pleasant bokeh.

Probably the Fuji has better copy to copy variation and tighter QC than Sony on their older fake Zeiss line lenses such as this FE55mm f1.8, the FE35mm f1.4Z, the FE35mm f2.8,though Sony has already improved it with the newer FE 50mm f1.4Z, which is objectively a great lens but I personally dislike for its awkward ergonomics and extreme Lo-CA at wideopen and near wideopen range. The FE55mm f1.8Z has significantly pronounced pincushion distortion but it is automatically corrected in the camera or in ACR or in C1 pro, or in DXO pro, however, that auto lens distortion correction makes the lens significantly softer in the edges and corners than it should have originally been without it. So in final images it usually ends up softer than the Fuji or the big FF Sigma lens on a Nikon body. The Loxia 50mm f2 is a lens designed after the legendary Leica mount Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens and its rendering characteristic is very similar to that of the Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM lens, but the Sony mount version is significantly sharper in the centers with a lot less lateral CA(still more pronounced green CA than the FE 55 or FE 50mm f1.4 Planar, though). And the Loxia is very good at handling complex contra-light scenes, and so it seldom produces terrible rainbow colored ghost...... , the Loxia is very very tactile and easy to MF precisely for video and for stills even including moderately fast moving things or people. So despite of its slightly slower max speed at f2 , I much prefer it to any of the other around 50mm primes for Sony or Fuji, or any of the Nikon 50mm primes.

However, if I can throw the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus lens into the mix, I prefer it to everything else I've compared here. The new Zeiss for Nikon and Canon mount is simply a superb lens with outstanding MF ring, I can MF it easily at f1.4 and get tack sharp images anytime......it's that good. IMHO, the Milvus 50mm f1.4 is the best 50mm prime ever made out side of the real Leica price territory..........the Leica 50mm f2 APO is slightly better I think but I can no longer afford it , I used to have it for a few months but I sold it to my grandpa(needed the money for my new storage system 70 four tera byte hard drives and 24 one tera byte SSDs, etc). I think the Milvus series is really underrated line of Ziess, it is actually as great as their more famous Otus line without the crazy bulk of the Otus series. I know the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otsus series primes are fantastic optically, but they are too impractical in real life scenes(outside of studio and landscape), and therefore, I am not a fan of them.

I love the Milvus line and the older ZF2 line Zeiss primes more than the new Batis or Loxia line Zeiss primes for Sony ,and I am sometimes thinking about going back to Nikon main for that very reason plus better flash and cheaper more practical lens line-up than the Sony FE or Fuji X.

But if you are simply looking for the best bang for your buck kind of a person, then I think there is nothing really beats the Nikon AF-S50mm f1.4G, which is actually a sharp lens if you shoot it at f2.2 or smaller aperture. And if you are like me tend to stop it down to at least f5.6 or so most of times, then the cheap Nikon 50 mm f1.4G is just as sharp as the expensive Loxia 50mm f2 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or Zony 50mm f1.4 Z. But for me the Milvus and the Loxia are both worth the high prices since they have the best MF ring for the Sony bodies, I really hate the fly-by-wire MF system of Zony or Fuji.

And it is obvious that all current tiny bodied mirrorless systems are overpriced and without the super heavy-handed software correction they can not compete well with the best Zeiss or Sigma primes for Nikon Canon mount system, in fact, the cheap Nikon f1.8G series primes beat many of the expensive Zony, Sony GM , Fuji XF lenses in terms of pure optical and mechanical quality, and it is a shocking fact to many.

I think why you may want to pay high premium for Loxia or Batis line if you shoot Sony FE system is that they seem to have very very high QC tolerances and chances are you may never get a bad copy of it at least an extremely bad one.

 

Comp 3> Sony 24-70mm f2.8GM vs Fuji 16-50mm f2.8 XF, Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD.

No comparison here. Sony should be ashamed with their zooms. Although I had a very good 24-70mm f4 and f2.8GM, they were still way behind what the 16-50mm f2.8, let alone the new Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 E VR......The Sony 24-70mm f4 Z is an OK lens for the modest price and compact size, but the 24-70mm f2.8 GM is a super expensive lens, costing about 300 hundreds more than the Nikon version and still optically not as good as the Nikon, or in fact I believe it is even a bit worse than the Tamron version for Nikon F mount.

In fact, lack of any quality zoom in the bread and butter range for event pros or part time paid photographers in the current Sony lens line up is a big minus point of Sony system regardless of the mirror type...........SLT or mirrorless.

And another issue is no Tamron, Sigma support for Sony E and A mount any more, this is a huge drawback of the system...........to say the least. If there was a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for Sony E mount, I would have bought it and replaced my Nikon mount version of it for my A7R and Nikon D750. It is very pathetic sad that we Sony users are always forced to get the overpriced GM or Batis line lenses even for the focal range where we might want to just get a "good enough" cheap off-brand lens option.

And in fact , in many cases I actually prefer Tamron lenses to Sony or Zeiss E mount lenses even without any discount or like that.

If I had the Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC option for my Sony system, then I wouldn't have bought a few copies of the Batis E 85mm f1.8 OSS and the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM and returned most of these. I simply prefer the Tamron to the Zeiss or Sony regardless of their prices or brand names in this case. The Tamorn 85mm f1.8,35mm f1.8VC, 45mm f1.8 VC, etc, are really great lenses and many times I've considered going back to Nikon main just for these modestly priced but high quality Tamron primes.

 

I think the Sony E16-70mm f4 (recent copies)are quite good, but still no where near the best APS-C zoom Fuji or Nikon makes for their respective APS-C system.........But in this case the Sony lens is at least very versatile and small unlike their FF zooms..........they are pure bogs, especially the 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm f2.8 GM....

 

Comp 4>Sony FE70-200mm f4 OSS, Nikon AF-S70-200mmf4GEDVR, Fuji XF55-200mm f4-5.6ED.

Well, in this comparison, I must say the Sony FE70-200mm f4G, at least the recent copy(made after 2015),is the best in the set. The Sony is cheaper and sharper and comes with tripod collar. The initial 3000 or so copies had the soft 200mm f4 setting issue, but the copies produced after 2015 July are much better, if you read the recent review on the Sony FE70-200mmf4 G at Ephotozine, you see it clearly, it is raved there, and they are usually an anti-Sony, pro Nikon site.

In Japan, the Sony FE70-200mm f4 G SSM lens is one of the biggest bargain lenses, and now Sony is giving a free Zeiss branded Protection filter for any one buys this lens.

So for me, in this range it is a no brainer. It is relatively compact, sharp throughout the range, with very well corrected almost flat field at most of focal range, it is a very very good zoom at very very reasonable price point.

The Nikon AF-S70-200mm f4G ED VR lens was a good lens when it was out. But now it seems really dated and overpriced. It is heavier than the Sony by about 205g, it is a bit longer than the Sony and much bigger and heavier than the relatively small(albeit darker)Fuji. The Nikon is less sharp at 70mm mark than the Sony at all aperture settings, with a bit more pronounced barrel distortion than that of the Sony. At 135mm setting, the Sony is still a bit sharper and better corrected. At 200mm f4, the Nikon might still be a bit sharper at 200mm f4 setting but not by much, the later recently released copies of the Sony is much better than the initially released copies that tested by most of so-called review sites, so you may see it seems much worse than it actually is at 200mm f4 setting at most of review sites, but it has really improved since 2015.

Compared to the cheap but dark Fuji zoom, the Fuji is overrated lens, obviously.

It is not the same class of the zoom as either the Nikon or the Sony 70-200mm f4 zoom. Claiming the XF55-200 dim zoom as good as the Sony FE 70-200mm f4 G is a bit of stretch. IMHO, the Fuji 55-200 is a bit fancier version of a typical kit zoom, that is all about it.

 

Comp 5> around 50mm macro lens: Sony FE 50mm f2.8 macro, Nikon AF-S60mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, Fuji 60mm f1.2 almost macro lens, Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG.

Well there is no need any serious analysis or reading at all about these lenses, I used to have all of these and I only kept the Sony.

The Sony FE 50mm f2.8 Macro is a fantastic lens especially for the modest price tag it carries. After all, it is the third very sharpest prime ever tested on the a7R2 and a7R.

It beats the about 100 US more expensive Nikon 60 G micro hands down, albeit the compromised slow AF, but in macro range no one use AF anyway.

For pure optical quality it is a absolute steal, it has very low CA, thanks to the amazing new ED element, it has very very low distortion, and it produces cool color(not as warm as Zeiss or G branded Sony lenses) and I prefer that personally, but many people especially those who love flowers or people head shots may prefer a bit warmer OOC color.

The Fuji 60mm f2.4 is an excellent lens too but it is not a REAL macro, it is only a half macro kind like the Canon EF24-70mm f4 L IS in macro mode.

So if you need the real macro capability in mirrorless system there is no other choice than the Sony or you must go down to m43 league, and I say go down but as for macro m43 system is not actually worse than FF or especially APS-C system unless you have super expensive macro lens plus macro ring flash and always 100 percent use a tripod.

The m43 allows you to focus stack automatically for better DOF, and it has excellent but reasonably priced compact macro lens choices such as the amazing Olympus 60mm f2.8, the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Leica branded lens, the Olympus and Panasonic 30mm f2.8 macro. And Panasonic will release long awaited X120mm f2.8 G macro lens very soon.

So for me and I think many casual macro shooters the m43 is the most interesting choice for macro work or just simple casual floower close up.

I love Sony 30mm f3.5 on my A6500 too, it is a cheap lens but very practical, you can really abuse it in rain, in cold mountains, etc, and it never breaks. Even if it breaks, hey who cares? it is very cheap indeed. But if you like shooting food or some product like some Star Wars figures or Mickey Mouse doll like I do, then the Sony FE50mm f2.8 macro is an excellent choice especially on the R bodies.

The cheap Sony macro is a bit less sharp than the amazingly sharp FE55mm f1.8Z on the A7R2, but it is just as sharp as the Sonnar on the A7R or the a7M2. And in my test comfortably beats the Loxia 50mm f2 in the center and especially in the edges, albeit a bit more pronounced Lo-CA in highlight or OOF area. In any case, the Sony FE50mm f2.8 is a real bargain deal lens in the current FE system, and this lens and the FE90mm f2.8G prove that actually there are many bargain deal lenses in the current harshly criticized as expensive or overpriced(mostly by non-Sony users) Sony lens system.

Comp 6> around 100mm macro lens: Sony FE90mm f2.8G, Tamron 90 mm f2.8 VC G2, Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8G ED Micro Nikkor, etc.

Well there is really no comp here, the Sony FE 90mm wins hands down as DXO and others all confirm it firmly. I had all of these plus the famous Voiklander 125mm f2.5 APO macro, and the FE 90mm f2.8 G is the absolute winner here, of course the Voiktlander is also a great lens but it is not as practical as the Sony in real life use.

The Sony lens also beats both the Zeiss 100 mm f2 ZF2 and the Milvus version in resolution, CA, distortion, and light fall off, so it is an outstanding lens without any doubt.

The lens really shines on the a7R2, but it is really good on any body but if your sensor is just 24mp FF , then it easily outresolves the low resolution sensor. It actually even outresolves the 42mp sensor. It is that good with respect to sheer resolution and measurable so-called objective IQ.

However, it is not really easy to use in real life since it is big and not balances well on any of Sony A7X body, let alone on any of A6XXX body. I think Sony really needs a bit bigger body for this type of truly outstanding optics that're clearly designed to resolve the next generation high resolution FF. Many internet review sites talk about the latest sensors out-resolving the lenses very often as the biggest issue of the high resolution FF camera system, but it is a big myth or even lie, it is better to have a sensor easily out-resolves any lens you can put on it because it really eliminates all sorts of bad sensor artifacts issues.

 

Body wise, I can only repeat what I said before. The last APS-C body I personally bought with my own money was the Sony A6500 and it feels good in my hands and it has great quality RAW file but terrible jpg's just like all the other Sony cameras. The shutter sounds very cheap with helplessly bad shutter shock, the rolling shutter in Electronic shutter mode is very bad and it gets even worse in video mode. But I never have the infamous heat issue with my A6500 in stills mode, just in video mode. My A6300 has terrible heat issue both in stills and in motion modes. I do not really have any issue with Sony menu system any more but I am already extremely used to it by using almost every single Sony AXXX and A7X camera........the short battery life issue is already solved since I have special USB charger for my mirrorless cameras and I have already collected 12 Sony batteries since the first NEX5. And to be fair to Sony, no other company mirrorless system has better battery life than these Sony cameras. So over all despite of the flawed mount design and questionable mechanical quality with terribly slow general operation speed of these cameras, I think Sony E mount system seems like still the best cost effective choice in the current mirrorless world with respect to simple body usability aspect of camera system, especially if you do not mind using fullframe lenses on an APS-C body.

The X-T2 is built like a tank but quite a bit heavier in the hand than the A6300 but not much heavier than the new A6500, which I also own and think also built like a tank.

The A7R2 is even heavier than the Fuji, albeit the lower quality body material used and poor body sealing quality. The Fuji is a much faster camera in the real world use, it shoots much faster than the A6300, the A7R2 or the A7M2 but the A6500 is even faster than the XT2 with a much longer lasting big buffer. However, the A6500 does not have any sort of external grip option that might have helped the balance of the system when a long tele photo lens is mounted on the camera, so the real life usability of the Fuji with a big AF lens is better than that of the A6500. The A6500 and the A6300 have very fast single shot AF and decent C AF in good light, so they should have had an external grip option for better balance with a big tele photo lens for action shooting.

The eye-detect AF and faceAF on the Fuji is just OK compared to the Sony's, but it is the only one aspect of AF performance where the Sony APS-C beats the Fuji XT2 or X-Pro2. But I am sure none of the current APS-C and FF mirrorless are as good as the upcoming GH5(that I've already pre-ordered and consider as a game-changer) with respect to AF performance and in general operation speed.

The Panasonic has the best AF in mirrorless world but even that is not even close to the decent Canon or Nikon D-SLR for action tracking. The D500 still blows anything from Sony, Fuji, Olympus out of the water and the AF performance gap in real lowlight between the best mirrorless and the mid level D-SLRs such as the D7200 and 80D is not getting smaller but bigger, IMHO, especially when a big telephoto lens is mounted on them. Mirrorless lowlight AF is actually not getting any better except with Panasonic system, this is a real shame. But all other areas of AF performance the Panasonic GH5 and the G85 are both better than any D-SLR, period. These two Panaosnics can focus down to minus 4EV without any issue, any D-SLR or other brand mirrorless cameras cannot even touch it with respect to extreme lowlight AF accuracy......The Sony A7MK2 on paper can focus down to the same level of lowlight minus 4EV, but in real life the Panasonic is a lot better in these extreme lowlight scenes.

The Jpeg quality of the Fuji is quite amazing and sometimes saves a lot of time, so I kind of appreciate that. But the Fuji XT2 or XP2, or even much cheaper new XT20 still have the infamous dust issue as with the Sony A7X and A6XXX........and this is the real reason I can never shoot my Sony or Fuji in Jpeg mode, I always need to remove about 46 dustspots in the sky whenever I use my XT2, A6300, A7M2, A7R2, or A6500, they really have severe dust issue and the worst of all the sensor of the A6500, the A7R2 and the A7M2 is very very difficult to clean safely without sending them in for Sony service center. The sensor of the Fuji's and the older Sony are at least much easier to clean without damaging the sensor or IBIS. I think the really effective automatic dust reduction system of the m43 is really underrated, and it is, I consider, one of these most effective real life weapons of the m43 system that Olympus and Panasonic might be able to effectively use against the others in their marketing or educational materials.

This is the main reason why I sold my A7X2 series cameras and kept my A6300/A6500 and A7R.

As for Fuji UI and controls initially I liked it and I was finding my way around the camera very easily and the Q menu of the Fuji system much easier and more logical to use than any Sony menu system, there is no comparison in this department and I think Sony should focus on this area and also the over all usability with increased operation speed of the camera "system". However, I quickly found out the amazing controls and UI of Fuji that all Fuji fanatics in Fuji rumor sites rave about is kind of working against me or many non retro prime shooters around me. I really hate the retro style bodies and controls inherited or borrowed from film era "my granpa generation", who was one of those anti-Vietnam war hipsters wearing crazy bell bottom jeans and flare shirts.

For me the film era UI and controls are very very difficult to use and very much stressful on my peace of mind. When I was shooting the XT2 there were times I literally felt wanting to throw it onto my grandpa's concrete car garage.....using it for a long period of time every day was that frustrating.

 

I think both the Fuji and the Sony system have serious lens issues; there is no thirdparty lens support other than obscure manual prime options from cheap obscure names. Zeiss makes a great set of primes for Sony and a couple for Fuji, but they are all primes.....

I think they need more great zooms than primes to become true rivals to Canon and Nikon system for really budget minded average camera buyers. I think they really need to persuade Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang to re-enter into the system.

Lack of any decent quality zoom in the so-called bread and butter focal range for the Sony or the Fuji mount system is a huge issue for many. There are no decent quality zooms in 100-400 range or 24-70mm FF equivalent range...........even if you accept to pay 2k for each zoom range. And in case of Sony, their 70-200mm f2.8GM OSS is a expensive but horrible lens with really bad quality control and copy to copy variation to date...

I have tested three copies of that lens and all of these 3 were terribly de-centered.

They all have terrible anti-flare coating and they all produced terrible green or magenta/ orange rainbow colored ghost and spot flare......and the distortion at the 70mm mark on this lens was simply monstorus, very very difficult to correct in PP. At the 200mm mark on this lens it gets even worse, the pinchusioning type of distortion at the 200mm mark on this lens is even harder to correct than the barrel type distortion at the 70mm mark.

If you are a pure prime shooter, then you might love the current great FE prime lineup and XF prime lineup, but for a mostly zoom shooter or for a documentary type of work that really requires a great mid range zoom, the Sony E system and the Fuji X system are both not great. Especially not great for those events where you do not want to change lenses over and over due to the dust issue or due to your shooting objects move fast, or you cannot simply zoom with your feet.

So while I think the Sony and the Fuji systems are really good for studio or landscape or location work where you can safely change lenses all the time and allowed to work on a tripod at very slow pace. But for any thing requires speed or a set of great 24-70 or 70-200 and 100-400 kind of zooms , they are just a pure joke, simply useless systems.

And for that type of works the DSLRs are much cheaper and much more trusted tools due to the much faster general operation speed, much better zoom lineup, much better third party lens support, much more reliable flash system,etc.

All that said both the Fuji and the Sony system are already very good for most of normal use cases and getting better and better every iteration, so I am quite positive about their short term future success.....but not very sure in the longer run............especially considering the fact Nikon and Canon will get more serious about their mirrorless offerings very soon.

And in case of Canon they are already no2 in mirrorless market only second to Olympus in total unit sales, and only second to Sony in market share by value.

I think if the Sony FE system and Fuji X system will not sell very well, or will not better the all Canon Nikon D-SLRs in unit based market share, no thirdparty will make a great set of zooms or any decent moderately fast primes at reasonable prices, and this extreme focus on highend market of Fuji and Sony may eventually hurt them seriously.

In order to get more NEW users coming into their systems they really need attractive lowend bodies like improved more rugged version of their X-A3 or A5100. In case of Fuji the cheap but very capable X-T20 may rectify this issue, but still they have very expensive (for those potential consumer body buyers)lens line issue and that must be fixed or they will slowly lose the momentum they've got since the XT2.

Personally, if I have to choose all from scratch again, then I would still choose the Sony system as my main system and maybe m43 to back it up for documentary work done while I am traveling. IMHO, the Olympus EM1MK2 or the Panasonic GH5 or the G85 based m43 system is much better than the Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 based system, at least much more practical with more stabilized lenses and much better flash capability.

So the m43 for action travel and video, the Sony FE for serious tripod work is still the logical choice for me.

 

I think Nikon is the best value system for most of things still, but I just cannot go back to D-SLR main, I feel it really odd whenever I look into the OVF of my D750. It feels really anachronistic and I do not like it at all, I always try hard to like it, though.

I really think Nikon needs a serious mirrorless system that fully utilizes all the current great Nikon F mount lenses at very least the E series lenses, or they will slowly falling into the irrelevant category.

After having owned about 22 Sony cameras in last 11 years or so, I have come to realize I can never fully trust Sony in the long run, and always looking for something else to move to or simply better value system, but I cannot find anything better than my current E mount set up just yet. But the continuously pushing the user base to their higher end products by incessantly replacing or discontinuing products that they do think not high-end enough or highly profitable enough for them eventually hurts them because this strategy will eventually exhaust many of their long time faithful users and at the same time it will scare potential new users away.

  

UPDATE: I interviewed many NORMAL camera buyers in my area at our camera shop and asked them to tell us about what was the main reason they did not buy so-called mirrorless any more, and why they think the market share of these mirrorless decreasing at least in the Western world and the already developed part of Asia such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea , Singapore and HK.

They answered to these questions carefully as we paid some $$ and I think we found out a few interesting things about the NORMAL camera buyers' perception/opinion about ILC cameras and the culture surrounding the camera business:

 

1 to them, if it requires a bag even a tiny one, it's really not important what kind of camera system it is; a mirrorless or a D-SLR, a m43 or a FF, it is just too big and simply too annoying to carry around. So they use their cellphone more even though many of them already have some sort of One cameras or cheap ILCs.

2 To most of NORMAL camera buying people here it really does not matter FF or m43 or APS-C or MF because they are all too difficult to operate and actually really not much different to each other in real life use(at least to them).

This means maybe the small sensor camera systems like the m43 and the Nikon One will all fail since there is no market for them. Not many average camera buyers are interested in ILC systems but fixed lens all around cameras with good one button wireless connection to their phones. And not many the fanatics get interested in these cause most of them are obsessed with the best IQ possible they can get out of a camera system. Thus Olympus, Nikon and Panasonic will definitely need a bigger sensor system to entice them.

3 they do not want a lens like Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art even if it is selling for $50 or less. In fact, any kind of lens interchangeability is not important to them, in fact it is really annoying, and if it is an all around just fixed lens camera like the Sony RX10MK3 , it is actually a better camera system than any type of ILC with a set of primes that most of camera forum denizens want. They should realize they are not the majority of camera buyers and making and selling exactly what they want does not actually help any of these camera makers........

To them a set of great dedicated APS-C primes may be an important part of a good camera system, but to most of NORMAL people it is just not an important or an alluring feature at all.

So as opposed to what Tony , Thom, and many other self-proclaimed experts in many camera forums think, a great set of APS-C dedicated primes will NOT help Nikon or Sony. In fact, outside of the forums most of people actually prefer ZOOMS.

4 To NORMAL people all interchangeable lens cameras are big and quite intimidating.

This means that the very common camera forum trend to get mirrorless for being less conspicuous in the public reason is a silly idea , no one actually cares about if it is a mirroless or a D-SLR, to them all interchangeable lens cameras are annoying and intimidating to most of non-photographers.......so if they really want to be less conspicuous they should try one of the One inch sensor fixed lens cameras.

 

So as I already pointed out, the camera makers should focus on developing fixed multi lenses multi sensored computational cameras with easy one-button wireless connectivity to the phones. The software must be intuitive and 21st century design rather than the current 1980 design, I think it should be user programmable and as Thom points out open the source code to the smart kids and then some of them will develop some good apps for them for free.

Remember why the 5DMK2 and the Panasonic GH2 became such huge hits? Because of the hacked firmwares, I think it is the key.

  

UPDATE2:The last two weeks or so, I have been testing my Batis 85mm f1.8 (I have 2 copies of it and I have access to 6 extra copies of it at my shop) vs the new Sony FE85mm f1.8.

And surprisingly enough I found the Sony cheap lens actually quite a bit sharper at f1.8 and probably throughout all f stops.

The bokeh or out of focus area rendition of the Batis seems to be a bit smoother, it has a bit less lateral CA, but it seems to be softer, actually obviously so. It is not a copy issue since I have also tested 6 extra Batis we have at our store.

Another big con of the Batis vs the Sony FE 85mm f1.8 is that the Batis has noticeably more pincushion distortion , if you turn off the in camera lens correction, you will see it in the EVF of any Sony A7X camera.

The color tone is also different, the Batis produces a bit warmer color than the Sony and many say they prefer the look of Zeiss, but honestly if you objectively blind test it you will soon realize the Sony renders everything more naturally with a bit more neutral tone. Many Zeiss fanboys just say it is a Zeiss, so it is a special lens, well really? Not all Zeiss lenses are great, only a very few Zeiss are actually great, and these days everything is designed with computer with using the same software, so every lens in the same size range is actually identically sharp, no dramatic difference there, really..

The Tamron 85mm f1.8VC, the Batis 85mm f1.8E, the Sony FE85mm f1.8, are all similarly sharp wide open, and from f2.8 the Sony is noticeably better than the Batis and the Tamron.

I also prefer the cooler out of the camera color of the Sony lens over the Tamron and the Zeiss Batis.

Now, we all know that Zeiss is not a better lens designer than Sony or Tamron , or any one..........maybe this fact is really hard for the fanboys to admit, but it is the reality.

IMHO, the only one minor drawback of the new Sony FE85mm f1.8 is the a bit harsh out of focus area rendition in strong back lit scene, and I think almost all Sony FE lenses share this issue.

The AF of the FE85mm f1.8 is much faster than the AF of the Batis 85mm f1.8E, so for shooting my cats indoor, I think the Sony is a much better lens. For weddings, I think the Batis may be a bit better since it renders our of focus area a bit smoother in extreme back lit scene. However, I do not like the warmer color signature of the Batis and many Japanese Zeiss lenses. I suspect the actual lens designer for the Batis series is Tamron, and therefore they share very similar look to the Tamron 85mm f1.8VC. I may be wrong here but I think I am right since the look Batis series lenses share is quite different from my MF Zeiss lenses including my Loxia lenses and ZF ZE lenses.

It is sad but I have to admit that almost all Zeiss Batis and Loxia lenses are just ok , nothing really special about these, except the 25mm, which is my favorite lens, and Loxia 21mm f2.8 and may be also the 50mm f2 Loxia.

The 18mm f3.5 Batis is a poorly designed lens, really should not carry the Zeiss blue badge. The Batis 85mm f1.8E was a great lens, at least I thought so until I compared it to the new cheap Sony 85mm f1.8, but now it is the softest 85mm in the current Sony E mount lens line up. The FE85mm f1.8, the Tamorn 85mm f1.8VC, the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art, the Sony 85mm f1.4GM are all sharper than the overpriced plastic coated bulky Batis 85m f1.8.

I am selling the Batis and get the Sony FE50mm f1.4 soon to replace my Loxia 50mm f2 and Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8.

 

But the most important change that this very humble Sony FE85mm f1.8 has induced in this industry is that it has kind of killed all charms of them43 system and the Fuji X.

The Fuji 56 f1.2 and the m43 fake Leica 42.5 mm f1.2 lens are great optically, but as a whole system, they are a much less capable system than a cheap Sony lens on a FF body.

  

UPDATE3: Recently, I decided to sell some of my Sony, Nikon, and Fuji gear and the results were really surprising.

 

I sold a couple of Fuji X-T2, a Sony A6500, a A6300, a A7R, a A7R2, three A7MK2. I also sold my Nikon D800E, D750, and D810.

 

The most expensive camera by far of the list was the A7R2, but surprisingly I got about identical amount of money for it to what I got for my much cheaper(as a brand new) D810. I paid about 3200 USD for my A7R2 in 2015 and shockingly it was devalued a lot more than I thought, I could only get about 1750 USD for it.

I must say it was a terrible loss.

I paid around 2000 US for my D810 in 2016, and got back about 1800 US for it in May 2017.

 

I got about 123000 yen for my X-T2, and I must say the resell value of this camera is great, I think Fuji has been controlling the price of this camera quite well. I just lost about 5000 yen on this camera and I have used it for more than 7 months, so it was a great deal. Renting it over 5 months and paid only 45 US or less, is an amazing deal.

 

I got offered only 72000 for my A7R and it was really pity, so I did not sell it.

 

I got only 64000 yen for my A6300, but I expected this so it was not really shocking, still it was a bad value camera, though. But it was replaced by the A6500, so I did not expect too much for this one.......

 

I got about 75000 yen for my A6500 and it was quite shocking, I expected to get more for that since I paid 118000 yen for it in last Oct.

 

I got 95000 yen for my A7MK2, it was quite sad, deplorable since it is a FF and cheaper than the X-T2 in the used camera market here.

I got about 134000 yen for my 2 year old D750, and it was a positive surprise. I did not expect to get this much of money for it since I paid only about 158000 yen for it in 2014.

 

So I realized Sony cameras seem to hold the worst resell value (by far) in Japan and my Thai friend told me in Thailand too.

I was about to sell my second A7R2, but I decided to keep it just for my FE16-35mm f4 and Voiklander 15mm f4.5 and Sony 85mm f1.8...

 

But the shocking loss by far this time was the Batis 85mm f1.8 or the Batis 18mm f2.8, I have lost a lot of money on those 2 lenses, and I did not expect this.....I thought I might get about 900 US for my Batis 85, but I got only about 630 US for it.

The 18mm Batis was even worse, I paid about 168000 yen for it in 2016..... and now I could get only about 98000 yen for it, it was the most shocking and the biggest loss by far, I never thought the resale value of the Batis 18mm f2.8 this bad.

  

So now I decided never buy any more Batis series lenses, I have lost too much on this terribly built so-called Zeiss(actually Tamron made) lenses.

  

UPDATE4: I am now in the process of replacing all my Sony E mount lenses(except a few) with Canon EF mount lenses.

I hated adapters, but after I tried the Sigma MC11, I changed my mind and I think it is much safer to use my Sony bodies with Canon lenses since Canon EF mount is the safest long term future proven mount, and the resell value of the super expensive Sony GM and so-called Sony Zeiss are too bad, the Batis line is even worse. So I think by selling off all expensive Sony E mount lenses that cannot be reused in any other mount system in the near future, I will be more secured and adding the Sigma adapter expand the possible AF lens selection for my FE bodies. After all, I realized that Sony FE zooms are all mediocre , even the most expensive GM ones.

 

I will replace my FE16-35mm f4 Z with a Canon EF16-35mm f4 L IS, I have compared ten copies of each and I am 100 percent sure the Canon is the better lens and cheaper one. In fact, the adapter plus the lens price is the same as the Sony FE16-35mm f4 Z alone. And another benefit of this lens over the FE16-35mm f4 Z is that the Canon lens does not extend its length when it zooms out or in.

 

I will also replace the FE24-70mm f4 with the EF24-70mm f4 LIS.

I will get the 40mm f2.8 STM, which is a surprisingly good lens for the modest size and price.

 

I will also add Sigma 135mm f1.8 Art, which is the sharpest lens ever produced by any one according to Photozone,de.

 

I also add Canon EF70-300mm f4-5.6IS MK2 lens, which is really cheap and for me it is a worth lens since I am not a serious telephoto shooter and so I do not want to invest over 100000 yen for a lens like FE70-300mm f4-5.6G, which is clearly overpriced.

 

I also add Tamron 35mm f1.8VC to replace my Sony FE 35mm f2.8 and Loxia 35mm f2, both of which I actually detest for the terrible corner quality and terrible coma(in case of the Loxia).

 

I may also add the amazing Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC G2, which is about half the price of the Sony FE70-200mmf2.8GM, and in my experience, the Tamron is the sharper lens(I compared 4 copies of each once at my shop).

 

I will keep my FE85mm f1.8, which is one of the best 85mm primes ever made and I much prefer this to the overpriced oversized GM and my plastic coated cheap looking Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8E lens.

 

I will also keep my Voiktlander 15mm f4.5 and 12mm f5.6.

  

UPDATE5: Many people including myself thought Nikon is dying, if not already dead by now, but in reality Nikon still sells many many more units than Sony and Nikon is now working on new type of sensor design and they may collaborate with Pentax and Olympus to set up a new sensor company. If this plays out well, then Sony will be the loser since they will have no one to sell their so-called Fullframe sensors any more. And as a result their highend camera prices will go up significantly.

And now Sony has just announced they've just decided to spin off their digital-imaging division(Sony DI) and now it is an independent business under Sony corp's supervision, just like their sensor group.....

This means now Sony imaging is not a part of Sony but their subsidiary, and therefore, to Sony device group, the imaging group is just a customer,nothing special, in fact,considering its size of market share in relation to that of Nikon, Sony imaging group is a lower class customer to the device group.

So there is no more reason for Sony device technology to keep the best sensor for in-house use-only. In fact now Sony device tech must compete with the new sensor company Nikon Olympus Ricoh have just established here and some European sensor designers such as CMOSIS, who makes the Leica SL sensor and M sensor.

And do not forget there is always Canon if Sony does not sell anything to Nikon.........Canon will start selling it and there will be Panasonic and Tower Jazz also........so Nikon will not have any problem choosing sensor suppliers any more.

Sony must sell their best sensors to Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax , or Sony will lose them, Sony cannot choose customers any more.

If Sony is smart, it will not compete with Nikon or Olympus in camera market. After all, Nikon is the biggest customer of Sony.....and Sony also buys steppers from Nikon anyway. So Sony is not dominating the sensor market, or controlling Nikon as many armchair experts in many camera fora think..........and the just announced Spun-off of their imaging division makes Sony camera business less trust-worthy........... Sony thinks every business as a short term investment and runs it to make it temporarily profitable and then spins it off.

After that? of course sells it to anyone willing to buy it.........like Sony did with the Vaio PC business, TV business, etc,etc.

That is why no one really trust Sony in the long run, we long term Sony users just use its cameras but always know it is a back-up plan or step-gap solution......

After all no serious camera buyers are as obtuse as many spec-chasers and review sites think they are. No one buys into a big expensive camera system just for an amazing set of features in a body or two...................there are many many more important aspects to a system camera than just a set of great features... I think Sony should try to be an Intel of camera.

 

UPDATE6:I attended a few academic conferences in Osaka, Kobe and Kyoto. And I visited many many very crowded tourists venues there and I have come to realize the death of real camera thing is nothing but extremely exaggerated by those silly clickbait sites. There were many many people still using a REAL ILC camera along with their smartphones.

Then what is the problem I've found there?

Well there were a very few people using so-called mirrorless there , especially the high-end mirrorless cameras like theA7R/A7R2,theA7M2, the X-T2, the X-P2, etc. I saw many m43 cameras even the EM1MK2 and GH5, I also spotted many people with XT20, A6300, etc, but I never spotted any A7R2, A7M2, XT2,etc......even at the most crowded tourist places like Kinkaku-ji temple, Kobe Great earthquake museum, Kiyomizudera temple, etc.

And that makes me worry about the long term future of so-called Mirrorless, if Sony and Fuji actually going under before Nikon?

 

To be honest, there are many many Nikon shooters and of course Canon guys and girls, but no A7 or XT2 guys at all.

 

In my last academic conferences in Tokyo area, I found it the same, and in Bangkok and Korea I did not see any Fuji or Sony high-end mirrorless bodies at all.

And more worrying fact was that there were so many Chinese tourists there with big cameras, but none of them shooting a Sony or a Fuji, that makes me really nervous about the future of Sony.

 

Sony is investing a lot of money very quick into the FE system but the ship seems to be sinking. I think the stupid shill marketing and silly "mirrorless taking over the entire industry "hype generated by Fuji and Sony paid internet sites is not at all working for them , but maybe working against them.

  

The temporal D800 success in the camera forums made Nikon this stupid!

   

  

The original ancient Odaiba island shot from Tokyo Rainbow bridge South route.

 

There were about 74 dust spots in the sky area of this image.

It took me about 23 minutes to get rid of these dirty spots.

Removing dust spots is tedious and very risky, difficult and sometimes deprives all the good charm of the image!

 

I always clean my A7R sensor and so it has a very few dust spots but my A7M2 always has about 34 -45 dust spots and it is really difficult to clean the sensor properly due to the terrible IBIS implementation in that body. My A6500 has the same reason and this is why I am debating replacing it with a Panasonic GH5 or G85. I think one of the biggest advantages of using m43 system is the super effective self sensor cleaning system and thus we can change lenses outside of our room without the fear of inviting dusts....but most of so-called reviewers always dismiss or even intentionally ignore it........

 

Why Fuji will never become mainstream (updated)

 

In Japan all die hard Fuji fanatics call fullframe as "Furu-size format" and that roughly translated into English like "old dated format", "stupid old format", "oldman's format",etc., and they all complaining about the size and cost of FF lens system, but is so-called FF really more expensive than the Fuji as a whole system?

 

After trying out the Fuji X system and comparing it to my own Sony, m43 and Nikon systems extensively for about 4 months, I really feel it is the best time for me to write about some seriously annoying real life issues of the Fuji X system and the Sony FE mount system compared to more modestly priced Nikon or Canon D-SLR system...as my answer to the above question that our die-hard Fuji fans asked us a few months ago in my local area.

 

There are a couple of disclaimers:

1> I have been shooting Sony as my main camera system for over a decade now and so I might be too biased towards them or against them, but either way I am not a fan of Sony corporation, especially after I started dealing with them in 2009 as one of our main business partners, I've become a bit anti-Sony kind of a photographer and I honestly think it is very difficult for me or actually any one to fully trust Sony as a long term business partner or anything like that. However, I must admit recently Sony has been rapidly improving in service and support area at least in ILC market.

But I think I know them much better than an average forum expert on this matter or any so-called pro reviewer out there because I can read their original Japanese marketing materials better and I've known a few of Sony imaging people very well since about 2008 or 2009. So I think I am qualified to compare Fuji vs Sony vs Nikon lens line here and write about that the 4 system comparison frankly.

2> there is no one better system to all others or close to ideal system for everybody, and unlike common forum belief , it is not like the more expensive camera, the always better it is at everything for everyone. So lets be honest if I had the money and room to put all kinds of cameras, then I would buy almost all formats and most of brands cameras maybe except Pentax.

However, in real life my room size is not getting any bigger, my income is now pretty much fixed and not going up or down any time very soon, so I have to choose one or two systems or maybe three from my current 5 systems I have now. And I am not anti any one or any system at all, just trying to be as neutral and rational as I can be..........however, as I said I am not bias-free either because I know Sony too much and definitely have clear preference and so I may make some wrong assessments/judgement on some systems.

Honestly, there are no really bad systems any more maybe except Pentax , which I firmly believe will go bankrupt very soon.........But hey even they or any one go bankrupt who cares? we are not buying their share but their cameras.

Anyway,I've really enjoyed using m43 for pure fun. For pure personal shooting I honestly prefer it to my so-called FF or the Fuji X system, I've found m43, especially Panasonic models such as the G85, the GH4 and GH5 and the Olympus EM1M2 very very intuitive and fast in all ways. And they are the best or easiest cameras to travel with at least for a budget air traveler like myself. The Panasonic GH5 and GH4 are amazing video making tools and I love them always. But for pure stills , especially landscapes or high resolution studio stuff they are not adequate. A 16mp or a 20mp chip simply cannot produce the resolution we need for high resolution landscapes or studio product shots. After all I am too used to 36mp and 42.4mp FF sensor output qualities.

But even for that kind of use, with Olympus we now at least have the high-resolution pixel shifting mode and that actually produces better result than most of FF cameras, at least for completely static things such as studio or products shots.

I have used it for a studio poster shot of a motor bike I advertised a few weeks ago in a local mag , and the result was simply stunning! However, it cannot work well for anything even slightly moving like flowers or slowly moving leaves...........or a bit windy day landscapes, etc.

For tripod long exposure work, I always preferred and still prefer my ancient Sony A7R and Nikon D810, the reason for that is simple they lack the annoying extra sensor heat generating IBIS gimmick. The IBIS is the most overrated feature of any camera system and I would rather not have it in any FF camera I buy. It generates extra heat, requires a more powerful processor, more ram and thus also requires more room for proper heat dissipation system...resulting in a much bigger heavier body for the same performance without it. The A6500 is much bigger and heavier than the A6300, the Panasonic GH5 is a much bigger body than the GH4 is, and ironically enough, all the mirrorless system supposed to be cheaper and smaller with simple electronics finder system getting bigger and heavier every iteration.

Plus, the IBIS actually makes the sensor nosier and less stable and much more difficult to clean it. My first A7R, which I bought in November 2013 still has a pretty clean sensor even after 4 years of extensive abuse in cold mountains. But my relatively new just 9 months old A7R2 and just 5 weeks old A6500 have lots of dust on their respective sensor, and it is not easy to clean them without damaging the IBIS or the sensor itself.

So for me the IBIS is actually minus point at least in a FF body despite of extreme love for the IBIS in many common forum.

That all said though, the IBIS is not actually a very bad gimmick on the smaller sensor system such as m43 or Sony APS-C, and I think the pluses may beat the minuses in a smaller sensor system. So I need to be clear I am only against IBIS in a FF body.

A7R2 and A7R are extremely slow and make me often waiting waiting for everything and that makes me often miss a few incredible once a life time kind of shooting opportunities.

So for me they are useless for corporate events or decisive street shots,etc. Sure the A7R2 has decent AF and shooting speed, but the camera operation speed is still way too slow;too slow to format the card, too slow to change LCD to EVF, too slow to wake up from a long sleep, etc, etc. And its video is useless, only able to shoot a few minutes and then heating up and suddenly stops shooting and some times even shuts it down itself.

The A6500 is a bit better and shoots a bit better video for a bit longer period, but basically it still has the same heating up excessively and suddenly shutting down issue.

So I recently down graded one of my two A6500 cameras to A6300, which I had before I bought my A6500, and now considering selling it too f