lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Dead possibly among those not doing Close-ups, Macros, BIFs. Yesterday I just tried a Fujifilm X-100T Digital Mirrorless Rangefinder to shoot a close-up of a sea shell with the on-camera flash and AF. It was horribly difficult since I'm just learning the camera. It was a little easier shooting the same subject with ambient light and MF!

I believe the camera has parallax correction and a lot of other features I'll need to learn. But it having a 23mm lens does not help for close-ups. Probably the wrong tool for Close-ups or Macro thus far. It should be easier with a Fujifilm X-Pro2 with a 56mm, 60mm, or 80mm lens. Similar camera otherwise with changeable lenses. If I like the X-100T for my wife for general shooting, I may buy a X-Pro2 for myself with a few lenses. But I must say this does not seem to be as obvious as using one of my Pentax DSLRs with a 35mm, 50mm, or 100mm macro lens. I can shoot those practically in my sleep. So I'm on the fence about MILC.

Murex Sea Shell Taken with Fuji X-100T: 23mm, AF, f/11, Flash, ISO 200

(Download)

Murex Sea Shell Taken with Pentax K-5: 50mm, MF, f/13, 1/25 sec, ISO 1600

(Download)

markwilliam1

The Sony RX10M4 uses the same AF tracking system as the Sony A9! Perfect for BIF.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

Panasonic G9 will give it a run for the money!

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

The only limitation of this choice is really really big* prints (not just really big* which it does OK but really really big* could be a problem.) But there are not many who need to print really really big*.

It is a great choice for the traveling birder.

*"really big" and "really really big" are trademarks terms of the Obtuse Camera Language Federation (OCLF)

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I am thinking HIGH quality, higher ISO, interchangeable lenses.....nothing against the RX10 ...

..

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

To me it already has. Exactly how would it have to prove itself to you?

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Since you ask allow me to answer.
Less vibration
No shutter wear when using the e-shutter
Silent shooting
Faster frame rates
No lens calibration
No camera tune ups, other than sensor cleaning
Better native lens designs
More customization
More information in the viewfinder or screen, if you choose
legacy and different brand lens usage
Face and eye tracking
More autofocus censors
focus peaking
WYSIWYG viewfinder
IBIS
Weight and Size
And cost when matching comparable cameras; ex: D5 $6500 / A9 $4000...D500 $2000 / A6500 $1100

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Thanks. For ME, for sports shooting, the comparison would be more like:

Canon 1DX MKII plus 70-200 f2.8L II (with IS & lens calibrated with FoCal) @ $5499+$1799 vs:
Sony A9 plus 70-200 f2.8 GM OSS @ $4499+$2598 - about $200 higher for the Canon in B&H pricing

Or substituting a Canon 400mm f2.8L @ $9,999 or a Sony 400mm f2.8 GM OSS @ $11,998 - about $1,000 higher for the Sony system.

Or substituting a Canon 500mm f4L @ $8,999 or a Sony 500mm f4 G SSM @$12,998 - about $3,000 higher for the Sony system. (again, B&H pricing)

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

You’re just not looking hard enough. The Fuji X-T3, for example, checks off many of your listed issues, for a lot less money.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

EOS R Body
Dimensions and Weight
Dimensions (W x H x D) 
Approx. 5.35 x 3.87 x 3.32 in. / 135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm 
Approx. 5.35 x 3.87 x 2.67 in. / 135.8 x 98.3 x 67.7mm (from grip to monitor)
Weight 
Approx. 1.46 lbs. / 660g (including battery, SD memory card; without body cap)
Approx. 1.28 lbs. / 580g (body only; without battery, card or body cap)

Dimensions and Weight From the Canon Website

EOS 5D Mark IV Body
Dimensions (W x H x D) 
Approx. 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99 in. / 150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm
Weight 
Approx. 31.39 oz. / 890g (Including battery, CF card and SD memory card)
Approx. 28.22 oz. / 800g (Body only; without battery, card, body cap and eyecup)

Or:
1.96lb Canon 5D IV (Including battery, CF card and SD memory card)
1.46lb Canon EOS R Body (Including battery, CF card and SD memory card)
0.50lb. A difference in body weight.

Are you really going to switch to save 0.50lb / 8oz.? on the new Canon EOS R Body? You can do the math for Nikon, Sony, etc. Perhaps in the future, I will change, but for now, there just isn’t any overwhelming reasons to do so, because there are just too many variables when comparing cost, size, quality, weight, etc. when comparing bodies with brand/off brand/vintage lenses. Also, my skill level is nowhere close to the performance potential available with my 5DIV, 6D and 7D bodies with “L” Glass. I really have to improve my skills before I can justify going mirrorless.

Look to the equipment that you currently using and ask yourself if you can “buy a better pic” with newer and “more better” equipment. I Love my hobby, but I would starve if I had to use it to make a living. I always strive to be better like Regis, Captain C, Brent Harder, etc. and when I get that once in a lifetime (for me) shot I applaud my success. JimmyT Sends

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Wait till the REAL ML Fan Boys arrive!!! LoL
SS

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

[quote=TriX]Thanks. For ME, for sports shooting, the comparison would be more like:


Or substituting a Canon 400mm f2.8L @ $9,999 or a Sony 400mm f2.8 GM OSS @ $11,998 - about $1,000 higher for the Sony system.

Ignoring the advantages...you would save $1500 on the bodies and still have more pixels to work with. These are the extreme match ups and leave out other details that may influence the purchase. Beside when delving into this price range its academic for all but a few and if the money is not troubling a few hundred dollar more or less probably wouldn't be the deciding factor. Hey...some people buy Leica and don't flinch.

I used Nikon and Sony only because I'm familiar with them

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Sounds like you have made up your mind. Of course go with what you enjoy. The big FF is an excellent choice. The smaller, and yes, the body of many such as Fuji and Olympus are smaller and lighter as are “most” of the lenses do offer excellence in many areas such as size, weight, focal length (life without an extender perhaps to prevent losing the stop or two) and at least with the Fuji, fabulous jpegs right out of camera. However, the large FF has its merits and you like it so go for it. It really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks. Enjoy!

Cheers!

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

[quote=joer]

And I quoted a iDXMKII system only because you quoted D5 vs A9 pricing. Not trying to convince anyone, just pointing out why a typical semi pro or pro shooter might not be ready to jump on the bandwagon...

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Yes, the X100 series with a 23mm lens is not a macro tool. It has huge advantages in its chosen field such as discreet street photography, etc. However, trying a XT3 or the older XPro 2 with a 80mm macro will provide you with the “real deal!” You won’t find a sharper image or better OOC product. If you are looking for a new Fuji, perhaps wait a bit for a new XPro 3 if they will make it. The new XT3 puts the Pro line and precious XT series well behind in IQ and technology. The XT3 is fast, with great low light functionality and is fabulous “in hand.”

Cheers!