Fred Miranda wrote:
After nearly 10 months since I pre-ordered the Fuji X100VI, it finally shipped from B&H Photo yesterday. Honestly, I had forgotten I even pre-ordered it!
It’ll be here on Monday, but now I’m wondering if I should even keep it, given that I recently purchased the X-Pro3 along with a bunch of Fuji lenses.
Here’s my current kit: X-Pro3, CV 18/2.8, CV 27/2, Laowa 10/4, CV 23/1.2, CV 50/1.2, TTArtisan 35/0.95, Fuji 27/2.8, Zeiss 32/1.8, and Fuji 70-300 + extenders.
I’m considering selling all my Fuji gear in exchange for the X100VI, since I already have a Leica and Sony bodies with similar focal lengths.
What do you think? Should I keep the X100VI or stick with what I’ve got?...Show more →
I view cameras as tools, so my thoughts come from that base. So that said, IMO the reasons for any Fuji X are size. But you have that in Leica. Leica and Sony glass is generally at least as good as CV glass. The XPro3 is a great body, but really not notably different than your Leica. Long way around saying you probably don’t need any Fuji X camera.
So it really comes down to what you want. To me the X100’s are toys, certainly capable but not really outstanding at anything, and definitely not very versatile. But, if you want it and will enjoy using it, then by all means enjoy it! Me personally, I’d spend the money on glass or a second body for an existing platform.
Without knowing the specifics of how you use it, my hunch would be to stick with what you have.
Fred Miranda wrote:
After nearly 10 months since I pre-ordered the Fuji X100VI, it finally shipped from B&H Photo yesterday. Honestly, I had forgotten I even pre-ordered it!
It’ll be here on Monday, but now I’m wondering if I should even keep it, given that I recently purchased the X-Pro3 along with a bunch of Fuji lenses.
Here’s my current kit: X-Pro3, CV 18/2.8, CV 27/2, Laowa 10/4, CV 23/1.2, CV 50/1.2, TTArtisan 35/0.95, Fuji 27/2.8, Zeiss 32/1.8, and Fuji 70-300 + extenders.
I’m considering selling all my Fuji gear in exchange for the X100VI, since I already have a Leica and Sony bodies with similar focal lengths.
What do you think? Should I keep the X100VI or stick with what I’ve got?...Show more →
Thanks for the thoughts, guys. I’m very happy with my gear, including the X-Pro3 and its lenses, and I also use the Leica Q2 a lot. The X100VI just threw a wrench into things, and I thought maybe it could replace something I already have because I don’t want to add another camera to my gear --- it adds too much choice.
I mainly shoot with the Leica M10-R and Sony A7CR UT with M-lenses. The Fuji is my fun camera that I always have with me, and the Q2 is primarily for travel with the family (not for dedicated landscape shooting).
I find that the A7CR 'UT' (Ultra thin sensor) could replace my Q2. So, maybe I could then use the X100VI for travel and compact daily walkaround? What do you think?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for the thoughts, guys. I’m very happy with my gear, including the X-Pro3 and its lenses, and I also use the Leica Q2 a lot. The X100VI just threw a wrench into things, and I thought maybe it could replace something I already have because I don’t want to add another camera to my gear --- it adds too much choice.
I mainly shoot with the Leica M10-R and Sony A7CR UT with M-lenses. The Fuji is my fun camera that I always have with me, and the Q2 is primarily for travel with the family (not for dedicated landscape shooting).
I find that the A7CR 'UT' (Ultra thin sensor) could replace my Q2. So, maybe I could then use the X100VI for travel and compact daily walkaround? What do you think?...Show more →
Makes sense. Do you want the AF in the X100vi? If so, done. If that’s not a big deal to you, is the X100vi smaller enough than the XPro3 with 23 to warrant keeping it? Personally I see a bigger advantage to the slightly larger but “fun” XPro3 with a second lens in a pocket, but that’s just me.
Other option is give the X100vi a quick workout. If you like it, great. If not you can likely sell it here for hardly any loss, certainly less than a week’s rental fee. At least this way you know and aren’t guessing.
Jack Flesher wrote:
If that’s not a big deal to you, is the X100vi smaller enough than the XPro3 with 23 to warrant keeping it? Personally I see a bigger advantage to the slightly larger but “fun” XPro3 with a second lens in a pocket, but that’s just me.
.
I agree with this statement. The XPro3 with 23 is slightly larger but much better and you can use your other lenses when desired.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for the thoughts, guys. I’m very happy with my gear, including the X-Pro3 and its lenses, and I also use the Leica Q2 a lot. The X100VI just threw a wrench into things, and I thought maybe it could replace something I already have because I don’t want to add another camera to my gear --- it adds too much choice.
I mainly shoot with the Leica M10-R and Sony A7CR UT with M-lenses. The Fuji is my fun camera that I always have with me, and the Q2 is primarily for travel with the family (not for dedicated landscape shooting).
I find that the A7CR 'UT' (Ultra thin sensor) could replace my Q2. So, maybe I could then use the X100VI for travel and compact daily walkaround? What do you think?...Show more →
Sell the other Fuji Gear -
Use the Fuji X100 for a few months/years and do a review comparing it against the Q2-
I love the Fuji Xpro 3 but the X100 is just like using a slimmed down version of it. You have enough camera gear, The Fuji X-Pro 3 isn't bringing anything new to the table IMO except a slightly smaller size. You have that already in Leica gear.
Thanks for all the suggestions, everyone. I’ve decided to sell the X100VI because I love the X-Pro3 too much to part with it. I might also sell some of the Fuji and Voigtlander lenses I bought for the X-mount instead.
I do reviews for Fuji lenses, so I actually need an interchangeable Fuji body. That was reason enough for this decision.
My B&H order for Silver, placed on Friday, Feb 23, 11:33 AM, just got delivered.
I am impressed by how beautiful it looks and feels in hand, but I didn't expect it to be this huge. I have never seen this camera in person before, so it feels too bulky compared to my Ricoh GRIII and GRIIIx. Honestly, I wouldn't have bought it if not for the hype but I am sure to enjoy it along with my Ricoh's and Sony's. Maybe I will travel with just a Fuji X100VI to India and Cambodia next month. I believe all current cameras are just too good and sometimes it feels good to have engineering masterpiece feel in hand. X100VI definitely feels that way.
The only Sony I felt that way in NEX7. I haven't seen the A7C's yet in person.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for all the suggestions, everyone. I’ve decided to sell the X100VI because I love the X-Pro3 too much to part with it. I might also sell some of the Fuji and Voigtlander lenses I bought for the X-mount instead.
I do reviews for Fuji lenses, so I actually need an interchangeable Fuji body. That was reason enough for this decision.
Fred, food for future thought…
I was a huge fan of the XPro2. I used it from the time it came out until a bit more than a year ago. However, it became clear to me that Fujifilm’s plans for a future model (beyond the XPro3, which did not excite me) were… unclear at best. (I’m not sure there will be another in the series.)
So I switched to the XT5, and I’m very happy with it. I don’t miss the optical viewfinder at all at this point. The camera is roughly the same size as the XPro and actually feels “tighter” and smaller in hand to me. The improvements to things like AF are worth it, and there is value in the 40MP sensor.
Ponder it. (Read my article at the link for more about my experience.)
For the past few years I have mostly used an X-H2S for birds and an X-T5 for nearly everything else, but I kept an X100V for things like visits to museums and other places where I wanted a very small and discreet camera with real controls. I sold it and ordered an X100VI the day that was announced. By the time it showed up, 6 months later, I had come to the conclusion that, much as I love the look and feel of the X100 series, a fixed lens camera didn’t really fit my needs. So I sold the X100VI for more than it cost to buy a new X-T50/16-50 kit.
One thing that convinced me was a comment by Michael Bulbenkian, who makes videos “explaining” Fujifilm equipment on their official YouTube channel, that you could think of the X-T50 as an X100VI with interchangeable lenses. I don’t quite agree with that, but in fact, the X-T50 with an XF 27mm/2.8 (which I already owned) is almost exactly the same size and weight as the X100VI.
xtabber wrote:
For the past few years I have mostly used an X-H2S for birds and an X-T5 for nearly everything else, but I kept an X100V for things like visits to museums and other places where I wanted a very small and discreet camera with real controls. I sold it and ordered an X100VI the day that was announced. By the time it showed up, 6 months later, I had come to the conclusion that, much as I love the look and feel of the X100 series, a fixed lens camera didn’t really fit my needs. So I sold the X100VI for more than it cost to buy a new X-T50/16-50 kit.
One thing that convinced me was a comment by Michael Bulbenkian, who makes videos “explaining” Fujifilm equipment on their official YouTube channel, that you could think of the X-T50 as an X100VI with interchangeable lenses. I don’t quite agree with that, but in fact, the X-T50 with an XF 27mm/2.8 (which I already owned) is almost exactly the same size and weight as the X100VI....Show more →
One of the XE models with that wonderful 27mm f/2.8 is actually slightly smaller and lighter than the X100vi.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Fred, food for future thought…
I was a huge fan of the XPro2. I used it from the time it came out until a bit more than a year ago. However, it became clear to me that Fujifilm’s plans for a future model (beyond the XPro3, which did not excite me) were… unclear at best. (I’m not sure there will be another in the series.)
So I switched to the XT5, and I’m very happy with it. I don’t miss the optical viewfinder at all at this point. The camera is roughly the same size as the XPro and actually feels “tighter” and smaller in hand to me. The improvements to things like AF are worth it, and there is value in the 40MP sensor.
Ponder it. (Read my article at the link for more about my experience.)
I agree about the XT5. I had it for a few months and loved it too. For some reason, I prefer rangefinder-style cameras with the viewfinder on the left instead of the middle (SLR style). But I’d definitely be super happy if the XT5 were my only Fuji camera.
xtabber wrote:
For the past few years I have mostly used an X-H2S for birds and an X-T5 for nearly everything else, but I kept an X100V for things like visits to museums and other places where I wanted a very small and discreet camera with real controls. I sold it and ordered an X100VI the day that was announced. By the time it showed up, 6 months later, I had come to the conclusion that, much as I love the look and feel of the X100 series, a fixed lens camera didn’t really fit my needs. So I sold the X100VI for more than it cost to buy a new X-T50/16-50 kit.
One thing that convinced me was a comment by Michael Bulbenkian, who makes videos “explaining” Fujifilm equipment on their official YouTube channel, that you could think of the X-T50 as an X100VI with interchangeable lenses. I don’t quite agree with that, but in fact, the X-T50 with an XF 27mm/2.8 (which I already owned) is almost exactly the same size and weight as the X100VI....Show more →
Don’t forget the X-T30. It’s another underappreciated Fuji gem. I shot with the X-T30 II and liked it a lot. It’s a super compact interchangeable lens camera. In the end, I’m one of those shooters who really appreciate the X-Pro3, especially with its hidden LCD.
The X-T30 II is a great camera. It has more controls than the X100 series and is about the same size. It has the same image quality as the X-T4/X100V. Plus you can pair it with all the small Fuji primes for a super compact setup.
Really good time to buy an XT5 in this site’s B&S. Put a 27 or even 23/2 on it, and you have a lot more camera than the X100vi at not much different size. Just sayin.
Geoff D F wrote:
The X-T30 II is a great camera. It has more controls than the X100 series and is about the same size. It has the same image quality as the X-T4/X100V. Plus you can pair it with all the small Fuji primes for a super compact setup.
TENOG wrote:
But no IBIS, if that's important to the user.
I was almost ready to start a poll thread on IBIS!
Seriously, given how effective it is for HH shooting I don't see myself ever wanting a body without it. It's a pretty big deal to me. Yes, I can make good, low shutter speed shots without it, but more like half or ¼ the reciprocal shutter speed and not 4 or 5 stops off like I can with IBIS... Repsect other's mileage may vary, but I know my limitations, and they're not getting any better as I age...
Jack Flesher wrote:
I was almost ready to start a poll thread on IBIS!
Seriously, given how effective it is for HH shooting I don't see myself ever wanting a body without it. It's a pretty big deal to me. Yes, I can make good, low shutter speed shots without it, but more like half or ¼ the reciprocal shutter speed and not 4 or 5 stops off like I can with IBIS... Repsect other's mileage may vary, but I know my limitations, and they're not getting any better as I age...
Shooting at low shutter speeds can yield creative compositions, but I usually don’t go slower than 1/60s or 1/125s to avoid motion blur. This range also ensures great sharpness in portraits. For moving subjects, I typically crank it up to 1/250s or even 1/500s, so IBIS isn’t effective there either. I can see the benefit for long lenses, but I rarely use them, and when I do, I rely on my XF 70-300 with in-lens image stabilization. Even with IBIS, I don’t find myself going slower than 1/60s often with my Fuji lenses which allows me steady shots. While it’s nice to have for special occasions, I’ve never felt it was necessary when shooting with Leica or Fuji. However, for those who shoot frequently in very low light and don’t want to use a tripod, IBIS can be a must-have.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Shooting at low shutter speeds can yield creative compositions, but I usually don’t go slower than 1/60s or 1/125s to avoid motion blur. This range also ensures great sharpness in portraits. For moving subjects, I typically crank it up to 1/250s or even 1/500s, so IBIS isn’t effective there. I can see the benefit for long lenses, but I rarely use them, and when I do, I rely on my XF 70-300 with in-lens image stabilization. Even with IBIS, I don’t find myself going slower than 1/60s often with my Fuji lenses which allows me steady shots. While it’s nice to have for special occasions, I’ve never felt it was necessary when shooting with Leica or Fuji. However, for those who shoot frequently in very low light and don’t want to use a tripod, IBIS can be a must-have....Show more →
Well articulated Fred, and I agree 100%.
For me, most of the time I am at my cameras "second tier" base ISO, about 200 on my XH2's, so I am frequently well over 1/250th during normal daytime shooting. I do however also shoot a lot at night or in darker interiors, especially when I travel, and here IBIS is a godsend even with the wider lenses because I'm using them usually at around f4 and then occasionally stopping them down to f6.3 or 7.1 for more optimal DoF. It's also nice that the newer gen BSI sensors are so good ISO-wise, also giving added flexibility. End of day IBIS isn't required for creating great images, but for me, it has been a frequently appreciated attribute.
