i'm digital camera shopping. Fuji X-A1..anyone?

[vash]

i am rethinking my camera ideas. i am done pining away for any Leica M whatever. i save and save, but something always gets in the way. that is a lot of money!!

i dont use my big, old Nikon D70 anymore. it throws a code and freezes everyonce in awhile. and it is huge for backpacking type stuff.

the world of compact, quality cameras has exploded. i am thinking of the Fujifilm,x-A1..changeable lenses..lighter, more compact..video. image stabilization.

i have a great vacation coming up..i am thinking about this..anyone have one?

[Aragorn]

These reviews is a little old but seems like sony might be a good choice for mirrorless.

The Best Mirrorless Cameras - Ditch Your Digital SLR | Roundup | PCMag.com

At B&H they have the sony a3000 with a 18-55 lens for around $400 (might be $50 instant savings too) and the sony a5100 for around $600.

[Eric Hahl]

I have the Fuji X-Pro 1 and really like it. It has a few quirks but I can live with them.

[nostatic]

Fuji is a love/hate brand. Tends more towards old school interface except for the one you're looking at. If you shoot jpg a lot of people love it. Raw can be problematic. Lots of great cameras our now just depends on your needs.

[dan88911]

ConsumerReports list the Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark ll as a high-performing stand out.

[gtc]

I borrowed a friend's for a while... even with a short, wide lens I thought it was still too big to be convenient. +1 for one of the Canons.

[5String43]

You might want to check out the Sony RX100. I've pretty much parked my DSLRs for most things in favor of one of these. But it depends on what you're trying to do.

[slodave]

My dad has the Fuji XT1. The thing is awesome! Super sharp. Complicated to learn to use, but once over that hill, great little camera.

[nostatic]

So, back to a proper keyboard and can give a longer and hopefully helpful response. I've obsessed over cameras on and off for many years and have tried most everything out there. Right now is a great time to buy a camera, as there are solutions to fit most any situation.

It really comes down to a few questions:

1. how big of a camera do you want to haul around?
2. what kind of quality output do you need (e.g. will you make big prints or post on the web?)
3. what kind of things do you typically shoot? e.g. indoor scenes at night, nature photos from far away, fast sports, etc.
4. do you want to hassle with interchangeable lenses?
5. how much do you want to spend?

That will get you into the ballpark of a few choices. Frankly, most people are best served by a camera that does *not* have interchangeable lenses. Some of the fixed lens cameras now are so good, they cover most of the bases.

One thing to note - I would never buy a "small sensor" camera at this point in time. The smallest I'd go with is 1" as you can get a small camera that handles well and gives great photos (e.g. Sony RX100iii). Your phone is now your "small sensor" camera. Look for something with at least 1" sensor, and bigger (micro 4/3, APS-C, FF).

A few favorite categories:

1. the all-arounder as long as you don't have to shoot long. Panasonic LX100 is a new model and a great choice (Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review). You get a big sensor compared to older compacts (a bit smaller than the Fuji), a fast lens, quick AF, and it isn't too big heavy. Another candidate in this category is the Sony RX100iii (I have the ii), and the Canon GX7.

2. the bridge camera. These used to be great except for the small sensor. Now they've grown up and can compete with dSLRs. Bridge cameras are like the all-arounder except have longer lenses for shooting nature, etc. Examples are the new Panasonic FZ1000 and Sony RX10. The Panasonic has a longer lens, the Sony has been out a bit longer. These pretty much "do it all" from a travel cam perspective.

3. the low light king. This is a niche category, but the Sony A7s is a crazy camera that will shoot in near-darkness. I have the A7 and a few lenses and will get the A7s at some point just because I usually am shooting in dark clubs and other low available light places.

4. the "I wanna look like a photographer" or "I have a special need" category. This is where dSLRs live at the moment, and to a certain extent, any interchangeable lens camera. If you need a super wide lens (like 16mm), or a super long lens (like 600mm), or you need to shoot high speed sports with perfect AF and a zillion frames per second, then you might need to go here. But frankly, most people don't. The dSLR remains a viable solution for pros, but oddly enough these days it is for *video* rather than stills.

5. The niche camera. Fuji fits in this with their X100s and XT1 in that they have old school analog controls. Some people love that and will shoot Fuji just for those controls. Leica is in the same boat although they have some very nice new cameras out that are more mainstream (they have a variant of the LX100) and of course they have a cult following.

Just depends on what you need and what you bond with. A camera is a tool, and some people are particular about their tools, some just want something to hit a nail, and some need a very particular type of tool.

[imcarthur]

Originally Posted by 5String43

You might want to check out the Sony RX100. I've pretty much parked my DSLRs for most things in favor of one of these. But it depends on what you're trying to do.

This is what I use on holidays. It will easily slip in a pocket or a belt-worn case. It takes amazing shots. Macro settings that work as well - low light, motion etc. I love it. Not cheap but worth it.

Ian

[vash]

Todd. I am looking for a fantastic camera I can push the envelope with low light stuff.

[nostatic]

Fuji isn't a particular low light champ - middle of the pack. It comes down to tradeoffs, but in general the larger the sensor, the better performance you'll get in low light. But it also depends on the lens and other factors. Right now the Sony A7s is the low-light champ. Not even a real close second unless you want to go for the high end Nikon/Canon which will be more money and much bigger/heavier. But even with the Sony, you'll have to figure out what lenses you want and then the price goes up. The 55/1.8 is spectacular. The 35/2.8 is really good, the 24-70/4 zoom is good. But longer glass will be pricey and heavy.

If you don't need a long lens, something like the LX100 is pretty hard to beat imho. With mirrorless you want the latest tech as the AF has gotten better and better over the years.

[Jim Richards]

This thread is timely for me. Subscribed!

[slodave]

I have to disagree with you, Todd about the Fuji being a mid range, low light camera. Test pix to follow in a bit between a D800e, D300, and the Fuji XT1 - possibly a Leica D-Lux 4.

[slodave]

These were taken in a dark room with a little bit of ambient light coming in from another room and a computer monitor that was on behind the camera. In short, the Fuji came out the least amount of noise. This test was not done in RAW, but fine jpeg. The cameras did do a little bit of noise reduction, but I think most people would not be shooting RAW when starting out anyway. The D300 seems to be a touch out of focus in the above, but still shows noise and was the worst of the three cameras. The D800e showed more noise than the Fuji. The Fuji is definitely not middle of the pack, but runs with the top of the pack. Granted, the Fuji is two years newer than the D800e and five plus years newer than the D300.


Nikon D800e ISO 3200, f4.5, 50mm, 6 sec


Nikon D300 ISO 3200, f4.8 (lens would not do f4.5 @50mm), 50mm, 6 sec


Fuji XT-1 ISO3200, f4.5, 50mm, 6 sec

[nostatic]

I had a pretty unimpressive brief outing with an XT1. I get why people like it, and the "Fuji colors" are certainly there. But I'm ok with noise depending on what it looks like.

That said, the OP was talking about the X-A1 which isn't on-par with the XT1. X-A1 is kind of an odd-duck for Fuji. It lacks any viewfinder, and isn't retro like its siblings. I don't think it sold very well, and I'd still consider it mid-pack for low light performance (plus raw files can still be problematic).

[slodave]

I realize vash is looking at a different model, but I still think that the X-A1 gets good low light reviews as well....

Fujifilm X-A1 - Is this the best low light camera for under $1500? (even though it only costs $499?)

My dad actually bought the X-T1 after a trip to Cuba with a well known photographer. The photographer was using one and basically leaves his D800 at home for these types of trips, where light packing is best. I have not really played with the X-T1 myself, but have personally seen the results and that camera rocks. Complicated to use with the dials, but tack sharp.

[dyusem]

Unsure what your budget is or intended use, but I'd check out the Pentax K-3 and put some fine Pentax glass in front of it and you will have a bunch of camera for quite some time.

[vash]

Originally Posted by slodave

I realize vash is looking at a different model, but I still think that the X-A1 gets good low light reviews as well....

Fujifilm X-A1 - Is this the best low light camera for under $1500? (even though it only costs $499?)

My dad actually bought the X-T1 after a trip to Cuba with a well known photographer. The photographer was using one and basically leaves his D800 at home for these types of trips, where light packing is best. I have not really played with the X-T1 myself, but have personally seen the results and that camera rocks. Complicated to use with the dials, but tack sharp.

the XA1 is actually what got me looking at FUJI..it's what i have pictured above.

i just wonder if i will miss a viewfinder..the photo landscape literally changed while i was sleeping.. i just sold all my film stuff..finally. no more leica rangefinders...no, i have one more in texas.

[Scott Douglas]

FWIW I'm having fun putting my old glass (LTM, M and soon Nikon F mount) on a used NEX 7.
It's got a view finder and with the adapters can take a lot of different lenses. I don't have a native Sony lens for it yet, but Christmas is coming.