Every few months...

[Solomon]

I need to convince myself that I don't need a full-frame camera. I've got a XT3 and several Fujifilm lenses, so it's not a casual decision. My good friend has a Nikon Z5, it's a very good camera on many levels. But what keeps me in the fujifilm camp is their small, lightweight primes. The Z line is slowly opening up to 3rd party lenses, but most of the native Z mount primes are huge. I have to remind myself, that I came to Fujifilm mirrorless for small and light. One additional fault I have found with the Z5 is that IBIS only works with Native Z Mount lenses.

Now, I can't find much wrong with the Sony RX1 line. I wish there were more in that vein and of course, I wish Fujifilm would offer resonably priced Fullframe bodies. Am I alone on this?

 

[mga010]

The full frame GAS syndrome is well-known. I fell for it too. Those were my three main reasons: The images are cleaner in the range I need most of the time (up to ISO1600), the Nikon Z5 was cheaper than the Fuji XT4, even considering lenses, and the Nikon Z lenses are outstanding. I never considered Sony, because I once learned to hate their menus. Maybe that was a mistake.

 

[dirk]

I need to convince myself that I don't need a full-frame camera

What exactly are you missing in your Fuji system?

But what keeps me in the fujifilm camp is their small, lightweight primes

That depends on the primes you are using and whether you want to upgrade to Fujis 40 MP sensor. Not all Fuji primes are small and lightweight and if you will go the 40MP route at Fuji, expect to need the newer and larger primes to exploit the 40MP sensor to its full potential.

the Nikon Z lenses are outstanding

Yes, the Z lenses are really good on average substantially better than the Nikon F-mount (DSLR) alternatives.

But if you compare APS-C systems with fullframe systems, you need to compare the details and determining factors for theor size and weight.

If you need shallow DOF, this is more difficult with a smaller sensor. Therefore the lenses for the same DOF effect are usually bigger and heavier with the smaller sensor. As soon as you have to deliver for 40 MP even more.

Another point to check is the size of the lens mount among all full frame systems. There is a huge difference between Sony and Nikon Z.

The bigger the diameter of the lens mount, the bigger will be all lenses for that system. Also the primes.

Take the Z mount as an example compared to the L-Mount. Z mount is bigger. So will be all Z mount lenses. You can not make the lenses thinner than the lens mount is.

With Z mount, you will get less lenses in the same bag than with L mount, if you use the Sigma i-series for L mount.

I used both systems and decided for the L mount after 1 year. This size advantage was a major driver for this decision.

But I also enjoy my Fuji XPro 2 with the 35/2.0 and 50/2.0 for example.

 

[Solomon]

The full frame GAS syndrome is well-known. I fell for it too. Those were my three main reasons: The images are cleaner in the range I need most of the time (up to ISO1600), the Nikon Z5 was cheaper than the Fuji XT4, even considering lenses, and the Nikon Z lenses are outstanding. I never considered Sony, because I once learned to hate their menus. Maybe that was a mistake.

The Z lenses really are excellent. And you are right, the aps-c sensor helps keep the lenses small.

 

[Solomon]

What exactly are you missing in your Fuji system?

Low light and shallow depth of field, and to be honest. I just have a vague feeling that FF gives you an intrinsically better file.


That depends on the primes you are using and whether you want to upgrade to Fujis 40 MP sensor. Not all Fuji primes are small and lightweight and if you will go the 40MP route at Fuji, expect to need the newer and larger primes to exploit the 40MP sensor to its full potential.




Yes, the Z lenses are really good on average substantially better than the Nikon F-mount (DSLR) alternatives.

But if you compare APS-C systems with fullframe systems, you need to compare the details and determining factors for theor size and weight.

If you need shallow DOF, this is more difficult with a smaller sensor. Therefore the lenses for the same DOF effect are usually bigger and heavier with the smaller sensor. As soon as you have to deliver for 40 MP even more.

Another point to check is the size of the lens mount among all full frame systems. There is a huge difference between Sony and Nikon Z.

The bigger the diameter of the lens mount, the bigger will be all lenses for that system. Also the primes.

Take the Z mount as an example compared to the L-Mount. Z mount is bigger. So will be all Z mount lenses. You can not make the lenses thinner than the lens mount is.

With Z mount, you will get less lenses in the same bag than with L mount, if you use the Sigma i-series for L mount.

I used both systems and decided for the L mount after 1 year. This size advantage was a major driver for this decision.

But I also enjoy my Fuji XPro 2 with the 35/2.0 and 50/2.0 for example.

I agree. Love my 2s.

 

[mga010]

And you are right, the aps-c sensor helps keep the lenses small.

I did not mention exactly that, but it is absolutely the best argument for APS-C. Fuji has a bunch of small and beautiful lenses. Nikon has made some for their Z system too, like the 28mm, the 40mm, the 24-50mm, and even a pancake lens. But in general, the Z lenses are huge in comparison. I owned a beautiful MFT 40mm macro, tiny and cheap. It was not on the same level as the Z 105mm MC VR, of course. But did I really need that? And that 105mm is a brick.

 

[Macro guy]

I need to convince myself that I don't need a full-frame camera. I've got a XT3 and several Fujifilm lenses, so it's not a casual decision. My good friend has a Nikon Z5, it's a very good camera on many levels. But what keeps me in the fujifilm camp is their small, lightweight primes. The Z line is slowly opening up to 3rd party lenses, but most of the native Z mount primes are huge. I have to remind myself, that I came to Fujifilm mirrorless for small and light. One additional fault I have found with the Z5 is that IBIS only works with Native Z Mount lenses.

Now, I can't find much wrong with the Sony RX1 line. I wish there were more in that vein and of course, I wish Fujifilm would offer resonably priced Fullframe bodies. Am I alone on this?

I have both full frame and Fuji X bodies. I find that unless you're printing REALLY big, (over 16x24) or unless you're shooting at really high ISO, you don't need a full frame system.

 

[Solomon]

I have both full frame and Fuji X bodies. I find that unless you're printing REALLY big, (over 16x24) or unless you're shooting at really high ISO, you don't need a full frame system.

Thanks.

 

[Conchscooter]

I don’t much care for bokeh. I like context. So half sized sensors work for me. Low light you can manage with the extraordinary IBIS in small sensors and compatible lenses. Embrace silhouettes! Dynamic range is where I miss full frame.