Ksocha Loc: Bethesda, MD

The Fuji is great, but believe me it's heavier with Fuji's good glass.

If you like, I will PM you a SmugMug URL to the photos taken last month with the GX8 and the Pny-Leica in the Galapagos. These files are jpgs, but are large. I also have a raw file of all of them. Do you really need more pixels?

BTW, I don't bother with video, but most people refer to Panasonic as a leader in that space.

Fuji is getting there, but every raw software works easily with the Panasonic. I also borrowed the Fuji 100-400 for a weekend. It's great but 50% heavier than the Pany-Leica

I like the Fuji so much I'm probably going to get a graphite XPro2, but if I were still biking as much as I used to I wouldn't be thinking Fuji.

Let me know if you want to see the Galapagos photos.

Ken

bpiekney Loc: Vienna, Virginia

I share CatMarley's views. I also have Nikon gear, the D750, and a Sony 6000. Both have found neat niches in old camera bags, relegated to inactivity by the recent acquisition of Fuji's XPro2. The D750 is going to stay there, at least for a while, and I'm not sure what I will do with the a6000. Why? Because the XPro2, which I have not had for long but have been extremely impressed with is now my camera of choice. I know the Pro2 is not your interest, but its size, weight and usability, qualities very similar to the XT2, are remarkable, and I would only add to the above comments with what I think is a relevant opinion that Fuji glass is spectacularly crisp, relatively lightweight, and is so at nearly all apertures and right out to the corners.

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

Not more pixels but APS-C sensor. Would love to see the Galapagos photos- send the link!
One other alternative might be the new Fuji coming out- "smaller brother" to the XT-2 with the same sensor and many of the same attributes.
Is the Fuji XT-2 about the same size and configuration of the Gx8?

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

Ah, that is why Fuji is so compelling- glowing reviews from people that use the equipment and have the background to make comparisons! Thanks for your input.

Ksocha Loc: Bethesda, MD

No, the XPro-2 is like the GX-8. The XT2 reminds me of the Oly MFT OM-1D. The Fuji configuration is better and overall easier to use. Aperture settings can be very different and some dislike what Fuji does. It does take getting used to.

mineart

I LOVE LOVE LOVE my X-T2!!!

To address your remarks in order:

• Yes, High ISO performance is excellent.

• I don't do video myself, but what i have seen is very good.

• I do not use the battery grip and have no complaints.

• The Lens IS is exceptional, and while a lot of the Fuji prime lenses are not stabilized, I have had no issue with mine because they tend to produce optically exceptional reasonable fast glass.

• I owned a Sony 6300 and am infinitely happier with the X-T2. The AF speed is equally fast if not faster and the hit rate is MUCH better in my experience.

• You want to select a RAW processor such as Iridescent Developer if you have an X-Trans sensor.

• The X-Trans sensor on the Fuji can't be beat in terms of filmic quality.

Also, if money is an issue, but the new X-T20. if you don't need the double card slots, weather sealing or battery grip it is essentially an X-T2 for $700 less. I have one of these also.

Kuzano

I am a huge fan of the custom profiles for varied shooting situations... 7 custom profiles, and the film simulation.

barryg

I own the camera. I have had many cameras in the past. In my experience, no other digital camera can compare with the X-T2 build quality except other Fuji's. As far as high ISO, if you are not enlarging >8x10, no problem. I find no problem with 11x14 prints at 3200. although LR is not yet customized for RAF, I use it routinely with excellent results. The accessory grip is not needed. The camera is very fast without it and its easy enough to change a battery if you need to. I have not found the need to change a battery during a day of shooting as long as I start our fully charged.

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

So appreciate your input!! I briefly looked at the X-T20 and thought that might be a solution. I feel that the Sony is limited by the lens selection while the Fuji has so much more to choose from. And that is probably the most important consideration to me.

bpiekney Loc: Vienna, Virginia

Just an observation, suntouched: Your question was nicely and thoroughly put, and the quality of the responses really does prove the unique and broad value of this site. A lot of very bright people with a great deal of experience with just about any kind of camera or post processing can bring their input to zero in on issues such as yours with immediacy. The occasional smart Alec comments are out there, but considering the huge number of UHHs, they are not much more than a speck on the horizon.

dck22

I had an X-Pro2 and Nikon D-750 with a lot of glass. After seeing the quality of the Fuji bodies and glass, I sold off the Nikon equipment for an XT-2 and additional lenses. The XT-2 is outstanding. Someone said the longer tele zoom are heavy. They may be relative to the other Fuji glass, but they are light when compared to the Tamron 70-200 and 150-600.

Stop thinking about it and get the XT-2. You will not be sorry!

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

In order to get specific, relative information I've learned that you have to ask specific questions directed to those that have hands on experience. Otherwise it's all speculation which can be fun but not very helpful. I have had very good results here.

SteveLew Loc: Sugar Land, TX

Between the Sony a6500 and the Fuji XT-2 here are the major difference. Before I begin these difference are based on facts between the two camera and my subjective feelings. Fuji has controls on top and it is not necessary to spend too much time with the menu. Menu is easy to understand. Fuji has two card slots. Fuji shoots 4K video for 10 minutes without the hand grip and 29.59 minutes with the grip. Fuji lenses are very good and reasonably prices and many offer stability control. Fuji offers film simulation adjustments for both photos and video like Acros, Velvia and Chrome. The Fuji has a different processor then the Sony.

The Sony a6500 offers in camera stability control and a touch screen. Not sure the length of the 4K video but I believe that the video is longer than the Fuji without the grip. The Sony has one card slot and most of the controls are via the touch screen menu. The assortment of lenses is many but comparable lenses tend to be more expensive than Fuji. Both brands are adding additional lenses at the same rate.

Both the Fuji XT-2 and the Sony a6500 are very good choices but these camera companies have very different philosophy. I suggest that you handle both cameras and get a feel for the fit and finish of each camera. If you shoot jpegs often I would tend toward the Fuji.

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

Yeah I know I need to DECIDE and stop ruminating :) I know if I don't get the Fuji I will feel I missed something. And it compliments what I already own. This much positive feedback is there for a reason. Thanks.

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

I know that handling the cameras is important but that simply isn't available where I live. Best Buy in Tucson has the best selection but not the models we are discussing. At this point the Fuji is backordered online. Hoping that resolves soon.