Went rogue selling Sony bought a Fuji XT3 as prime camera (Page 2): It was $500 off of the Fuji XT3 with 16 to lens. Picked the XT3 with the 16 80 lens. Didn't get the XT4 the new...

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

It was $500 off of the Fuji XT3 with 16 to lens. Picked the XT3 with the 16 80 lens. Didn't get the XT4 the new model. It is much more expensive. Only compromise is XT4 has stabilization. But the lens has it.
Sony sell probably 4-5 grand. Maybe another more of my cine lens. Watching used market ebay etc and companies that buy and sell that are good. Will see how the resale market is. Being patient works.
Fuji's sale prices B&H was a surprise. Might keep Sony a7s II amazing camera with one lens.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

[quote=AndyT]I absolutely love the control layout, easy access without having to dive through menus, and image quaility of my Fuji X-T2. Best purchase I ever made. I still enjoy my Nikon D 7100, but always reach for the Fuji.[/quot

Andy interesting post. I had a lot of Nikons for years. D7000 etc etc. I shot a video for a school
with the 7000 and loved the camera. Got me started in the video business. First Video with mirrorless camera.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

jerryc41 wrote:

That's irrelevant, but selling used gear for more than you paid for it is dreaming. The sale of the old equipment could bring in more money than the new gear cost, though. That's ideal.

I never got more then I paid for a camera. But generally my older great Sony camcorder got 60% on ebay.
My cameras and lens are in great shape. You always ask and tell very insightful questions and answers.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

Thank you all very much for the information on Fugi sites with good references.
Your encouragement and information is why I joined this forum a few years ago.

Stay safe and sane. Be careful. I now live in the house behind my daughter and my 2 grandchildren.
Protecting the children is very important. Happy Holidays.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

I predict you’re gonna LOVE the Fuji. Since my original purchase with the zoom, I’ve added the 90 f2 and the 50 f2, and they are great pieces of glass. Be sure to check the FW rev on yours (and upgrade if any later revs are useful to you) - Fuji is regularly adding improvements via FW upgrades.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

Tomcat5133 wrote:

Thank you Jerry. I was reviewing my Sony camera's ... (show quote)

I've been adding to my Sony supply (except for lenses). I went from an a330 to an a77 (which I still have) to an a99ii (used) and I'll be buying a new lens today or tomorrow to go with the ff, a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens - I don't own any Sony lenses...just not in my available (or not so available) budget now. I didn't want to go though the expense of buying a mirrorless body and a separate adapter - or all new lenses. I've only had the a99ii since this spring (I think) so I haven't had time to really wring it out. I bought a Lumix FZ-200 for a trip to Israel a few years ago, but hardly ever use it nowadays.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

jtwind wrote:

I ditched the full frame stuff awhile back, just found it wasn't needed for anything I do. I did stick with sony though, again does the job wonderfully and I own it and am familier. Maybe it wasn't a good example but have owned a couple of fuji x100's, loved the look and feel and quality but I never got comfortable with the menu's?

It’s interesting how people seem to take to different menu layouts.
I wonder what neurological differences there might be between people who prefer one over the other.
I started out with film and to me, the layout and menu of Fuji is very intuitive. Heck, I didn’t open the manual for weeks after I got my first Fuji! I’m not kidding. I’ve used Nikon since early1970 so just grew along with the system. I really, really wanted to lover my Olympus EM-1 but the menu system and layout had me pulling my hair out. I have played with Sony but to me, it’s design is for a younger person and you can see/feel the video camera heritage in the still cameras.

KoenigPhotography Loc: Orange County California

jtwind wrote:

I ditched the full frame stuff awhile back, just found it wasn't needed for anything I do. I did stick with sony though, again does the job wonderfully and I own it and am familier. Maybe it wasn't a good example but have owned a couple of fuji x100's, loved the look and feel and quality but I never got comfortable with the menu's?

I kept my Sony Full frame Camera but Traded in my PhaseOne DF645 system for a Fuji XH1 system and love it ! Now thinking about selling the Sony A7r2 ! Mark

DennisC. Loc: Antelope, CA

Tomcat5133 wrote:

Went rogue selling some of my good Sony cameras lens etc and bought a Fuji XT3 with lens a
Black Friday deal. A photographer from San Francisco wrote an extensive article about his work
with aps-c camera's and his work is outstanding. He resisted larger gear and has been very successful.
I have Full frame and bridge and small like the RX100 4. But was intrigued by the Fuji camera's.
I don't want to identify him so he won't get a lot of crazy online stuff like Ken Rockwell gets.

He’s already well known.

aikiboy

I have been using Panasonic and Olympus M43 but have been tempted by Fuji for years and have considered the X-T3. I didn't buy it due to the lack of IBIS. The X-T4 just seemed too expensive. How much stabilization do the lenses provide and has the lack of stabilization for those of you who are using the X-T3 proved limiting?

Hanson

On a non-professional level, you don't even need MFT, APSC or FF to be successful. A phone or a small point-and-shoot may be sufficient. It is the talent behind the lens. But we all go for better systems for the sake of self-satisfaction or ego?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

aikiboy wrote:

I have been using Panasonic and Olympus M43 but have been tempted by Fuji for years and have considered the X-T3. I didn't buy it due to the lack of IBIS. The X-T4 just seemed too expensive. How much stabilization do the lenses provide and has the lack of stabilization for those of you who are using the X-T3 proved limiting?

I have an X-T2 and frankly, I never notice the lack of IBIS (as opposed to OIS), BUT the type of images I shoot, which usually involve moving subjects, doesn’t benefit from IBIS because my SS to freeze the action is adequate to prevent camera shake issues. Where I do find stabilization useful, is on longer teles, where OIS is typically more useful anyway.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Hanson wrote:

On a non-professional level, you don't even need MFT, APSC or FF to be successful. A phone or a small point-and-shoot may be sufficient. It is the talent behind the lens. But we all go for better systems for the sake of self-satisfaction or ego?

With all due respect, I think that’s a mistaken generalization. It has very little to do with ego or self satisfaction and everything to do with capable tools. Cellphones are fine and well. And I use them and APS-C (and MF) also, but try shooting indoor sports in low light (as just one example), and you’ll understand why pros shoot FF under similar conditions. Why is it that members are trying to constantly justify smaller formats? The fact is that if you can manage the size, weight and expense of a larger format, it will always have higher performance. Now whether you need that performance or are willing to pay the price is a different question. My go-to Camera is becoming my Fuji crop body, but I know, that if I’m willing to deal with the size/weight, that my FF Canon will out perform it (but the Fuji is good ENOUGH for the task at hand).

Flash Falasca Loc: Beverly Hills, Florida

I sold my Nikon D800 and bought Fuji and love it never looking back !! Will buy a new Fuji X-S10 very soon !!

Hanson

No deny about the capability aspect. That is why I also have a Sony FF. But a cell phone can certainly produce "successful" photos.