Canon 5D MIII to Fuji X-T1

[zlatko]

I would rather use a SL1....

The SL1 is so good. The only thing that brings it down for me is the small viewfinder. It's just too small. It's ok for quick shooting. But hard to use when you're used to a big viewfinder and really want to see the subject for framing or timing the moment.

One thing about the X-T1 that no one seems to mention is the viewfinder blackout time. In drive mode S (single frame), the blackout time makes it seem like every shot is taken at 1/20th or 1/30th second, even when the shutter speed is much faster. And in the continuous drive modes (CL and CH) you get a brief playback of the image even if playback is set to OFF. WTF?

 

[zlatko]

... and, on the Fuji in particular, the elaborate menu systems and generally ragged ergonomics, that she found a new love for her dSLR, and learned to pack more efficiently.

This! Fuji menus have some fundamental flaws and "ragged" is a good description of the ergonomics. Fuji doesn't seem to understand how important this is. Canon has really refined their menu system and ergonomics beyond what other manufacturers seem to be capable of.

And if someone finds the 5D3 and 24-105L to be heavy, Canon makes a lot of lighter options.

 

[qska]

Hi!

I'm using a Canon 5D MIII with 24-105 and 100mm L Macro
I'm mostly interested in landscape, landscape astrophotography and Macro.

Unfortunately I feel that my kit is heavy, so I'm thinking to swap it with Fuji X-T1 with 16-55 f2.8 lens and Zeiss 50mm Macro (I'll upgrade this to Fuji 120mm Macro when it's available)

Do you think I'd miss a lot after this switch?

Thanks in advance for your help

Oh where do I start....

Long story short - I have a 6D with a bunch of Sigma Art lenses and basic L series zooms (24-105, 17-40).
I wanted smaller gear, so I tried:
Panasonic G3, GX7, Fuji XE-2, X-T1.

For the Fuji I had the 18-55, 10-24, 35 1.4, 60mm 2.4 lenses, so quite a lot of them...

Landscape wise I think Fuji system is quite competent, but:
- the X-Trans sensor processed in Lightroom produces "smearing artefacts" (google this for more info),
- X-Trans files are SLOW to process in Lightroom, on average 3x times slower to import/export than any Bayer sensor,
- RAW files are large (compared to pixel count)

Now for other drawbawcks, non-landscape related....

X-E2 was quite poor with moving subjects (my kids), so I took the plunge and gave Fuji even more of my money, thinking X-T1 will be the answer... And it almost was.
The AF was much better, but the camera didn't give me enough confidence that the Focus was spot on, so I ended up taking 3 times as many shots as I did with Canon - and for a good reason, as the Fuji still had random AF failures (focused on the background for example).

But the biggest issue was the handling. I thought I'll like the idea of aperture dials, shutter speed dials and all that. But in reality it sucked. Why? The dials were quite stiff to turn, so I needed to take the camera away from my eye to adjust anything. In my 6D I can do everything while still looking through the viewfinder.

And viewfinder... My Goodness... X-T1 has a nice "small TV" in it, but it is just that - a display. As other commenters pointed out - it suffered horrible blackouts, especially when shooting in Burst mode. Tracking my kids running around was very very hard.

What surprised me the most though was a side effect of a smaller bulk - the camera felt more like a toy, and I didn't end up using the same rigour when shooting. I was throwing it around like a Point and Shoot, didn't take the time to e.g. crouch as much as I should, or compose the shot adequately.

Also, smaller and lighter cameras are easier to introduce the camera shake (physics).

Another thing - lenses.

Canon has a nice lineup of decent quality and CHEAP lenses (24-105, 17-40, Sigmas non-art etc.). Fuji has some crap lenses (XC series), and VERY expensive "proper" lenses (XF), but nothing in the middle.

So I ended up selling my 17-40 for X, and had to pay almost twice as much for the Fuji 10-24, which wasn't even that much smaller!

One of the staple Fuji lenses, 35mm 1.4 had very "digital" bokeh, was slow to focus....

So in the end I sold all the Fuji stuff, and overpaid the mortgage with the money - it's a better use of cash

One more thing - some Fuji lenses (35mm, 60mm) are NOISY. I didn't use a Canon lens that made any noise since... 5 years? I was SHOCKED that Fuji lenses could sound this bad in 2015 - and nobody even mentions it!

So why did I end up selling the Fuji? The reason is simple. Originally I wanted to switch from Canon to Fuji altogether, but the Fuji system just wasn't delivering... I took about 6000 shots with both the XE2 and XT1, and I had some keepers, but the rate was much lower than for my 6D.

One more thing - flash support... Don't get me started... Canon is Ferrari, Fuji is 1960s Ferrari (fully manual, single-shot mode only). It even disables the flash in Continuous shooting mode! I find this inexplicable.

PS. Lumix G3/G7X - similar story, albeit they suffered from NOISE in the blue skies even at their base ISO 200.

PS2. All small cameras have handling handicaps. There isn't a more comfortable camera to USE than a DSLR. There are more comfortable cameras to CARRY, but not USE

Anyway, good luck

 

[qska]

One final thing - from all these adventures with Lumix/Fuji I went with... Canon EOS M2!

There's a great deal on eBay, I got 11-22, 22, 18-55, the flash, EF adapter and the body for less than the Fuji X-E2 body alone!

And the M2 with 11-22 is my secondary camera on all trips - the 6D with 50mm 1.4 or 24-105, M2 with the ultrawide. Works a treat!

 

[Hillsilly]

DSLR systems are absolutely essential in particular for men....

This is my perspective. When I go out with a DSLR, girls run a mile. Yet when I go out with my X100 or X-E1, girls actually come up to me to discuss photography and camera gear. Even my wife (who has almost zero interest in cameras) has commented numerous times how sexy my Fuji cameras look. So the short answer is simple - If you are single, get an X100. Now that I've sorted out everyone's love life sorted out, back to the OP.

You've mentioned your interests as landscape, landscape astrophotography and Macro. There's no reason why an X-T1 shouldn't be a serious alternative to your 5D3. Some things to consider is that you'll lose some MPs, depending on what lens you normally use for astrophotography, there might not be a Fuji alternative (I don't have one, but I assume the 16-55 would be perfect for this.) Other people have a different perspective, but I personally find shooting at night time with the Fujis a lot easier as the EVFs have the ability to boost the image and you can easily see if it properly focused. With Macro, I've got the Fuji 60mm and (apart from AF speed - a problem not uncommon with macro lenses) its a very nice lens. (and the Zeiss is probably better.) The image quality is as good/better than my non-L Canon 100mm. Although this could also be because of the sharper images that Fuji cameras make. It only goes to 1:2 (or 2:1...which ever means half life size). But if you're serious about Macro, the beauty of mirrorless cameras is that you can mount and use almost any macro lens that you want to use. And when I want 3x or 4x magnification I use the old reverse mounted lens coupled to a bigger lens trick.

If you look at any of the Fuji forums (such as Fujix-forum.com) you'll quickly pick up that most people buying into the system are knowledgeable photographers who have both a DSLR and mirrorless system. You'll also quickly pick up that unless you're shooting sports, action etc the Fuji cameras are as good (if not better) for everything else.

By the way, the new 16-55 is a big, expensive lens. Apart from weather resistance and the f2.8 aperture at the long end, I don't know if it has many benefits over the kit lens. There is a 16/1.4 about to be released that might be really good for landscape and astrophotography.

 

[Hillsilly]

Fuji has some crap lenses (XC series)

Just curious why you'd put it that way? I'd struggle to objectively find a bad Fuji lens. I can't think of one - that's one the main selling points for the system. I've got an XC lens - the 50-230. It was $230, provides a sharp 350mm FF eq, has effective IS and weighs only 375g. Its a really nice travel lens for landscapes and street scenes when using a tripod or in good light. As you'd expect from the price and weight, it doesn't feel like a solidly built lens, but the image quality (as, I understand, is the same with all XC lenses) is fine. The XC lenses are really good value. Plus you can shoot wildlife with it!

 

[martti]

A bit off subject but on the Leboncoin buy&sell site I could exchange my Canon to a LeicaM6 or a FujiXT.
The other way around no offers...
edit: Yes, in fact there are now...goes both ways, it seems.

 

[Hector1970]

There's no doubting Fuji produce goodproducts and the XTI is a good camera.
I have the Fuji x100s and it is good.
Image quality as good as it is Just doesn't equal a full frame 5D Mark III .
The 5D mark III is a no excuse camera . If the quality is poor it's the photographers fault.
So for weight it's the right decision . It's the image quality that potentially could disappoint you but only because you are used to something special.

 

[mustafaakarsu]

Thanks a lot for responses, I couldn't ask for more.
Having both system is out of question for me,
But having a Canon mirrorless body may be an alternative.
And yes giving up on a 5D MIII is actually not easy, it's a great camera. I think I'll keep reading about the camera and try to find one to use it for a short time, so I'd have a better idea

 

[AvTvM]

But having a Canon mirrorless body may be an alternative.

The EOS M3 will be out shortly - it will definitely be an improvement over the EOS M and M2 in some of the most critical areas, especially AF-speed. Also the body is a bit more chunky offering more grip - which many users will probably like. Jury is still out re. image quality from the new Canon 24 MP APS-C sensor as well as overall performance from that new body.

All those compact and cheap Canon EF-M lenses are definitely little price-value miracles and well worth every cent. I got them all and really like them. Additionally there is the small adapter for EF-S and EF lenses, which does come in handy for using special lenses. Since I have it, I use the EOS M (1) significantly more often than my EOS 5D III with big, heavy L glass. Basically for me it is EOS M for everyday/street use and 5D III only for specific, planned shootings, events, low light.

Unfortunately the EOS-M3 will initially not be sold in the U.S. (and Canada). Depending on how well it sells in Asia and Europe, Canon may decide to bring it to North America as well. But even then the M3 (plus EVF-DC1 external electonic viewfinder!) will be available from Japan / Asia / Europe via ebay and other sources.

 

[Random Orbits]

All those compact and cheap Canon EF-M lenses are definitely little price-value miracles and well worth every cent. I got them all and really like them. Additionally there is the small adapter for EF-S and EF lenses, which does come in handy for using special lenses. Since I have it, I use the EOS M (1) significantly more often than my EOS 5D III with big, heavy L glass. Basically for me it is EOS M for everyday/street use and 5D III only for specific, planned shootings, events, low light.

How well does the EF-M 55-200 work? Can't find many reviews on that lens.

 

[AvTvM]

How well does the EF-M 55-200 work? Can't find many reviews on that lens.

for me ... generally very well. Used the EF-S 55-250 IS STM first via EF/EF-M adapter. Then got the native EF-M 55-200mm because it is quite a bit more compact and I was willing to give up 50mm and half a stop of light on the long end. Obviously it is not suitable for action sports - but neither is the EOS M/M2 AF system. I see IQ between the 2 lenses pretty much as equal - meaning, "worth every cent the lens costs and then some". 8)

Adobe Lightroom 5.7.1 / Camera Raw 8.7.1 does not offer a lens profile for automatic lens correction for the EF-M 55-200 yet. I manually select "Canon" and LR then automatically picks the EF-S 55-250 IS STM profile. Seems to work reasonably well.

Some Images I've taken with EF-M 55-200 on EOS M at different focal lengths:

 

[Random Orbits]

How well does the EF-M 55-200 work? Can't find many reviews on that lens.

for me ... generally very well. Used the EF-S 55-250 IS STM first via EF/EF-M adapter. Then got the native EF-M 55-200mm because it is quite a bit more compact and I was willing to give up 50mm and half a stop of light on the long end. Obviously it is not suitable for action sports - but neither is the EOS M/M2 AF system. I see IQ between the 2 lenses pretty much as equal - meaning, "worth every cent the lens costs and then some". 8)

Adobe Lightroom 5.7.1 / Camera Raw 8.7.1 does not offer a lens profile for automatic lens correction for the EF-M 55-200 yet. I manually select "Canon" and LR then automatically picks the EF-S 55-250 IS STM profile. Seems to work reasonably well.

Some Images I've taken with EF-M 55-200 on EOS M at different focal lengths:

Thanks for sharing your experience!

 

[Bennymiata]

Fuji make some of the best lenses on the market, hence why all the new Hasselblad lenses are made Fuji, as are many of the top of the line video lenses.
I've had a few Fuji cameras and have been happy with all of them, but they aren't a substitute for my 5D3.
For fun and casual photography they are great, but for serious photography, you can't beat a good DSLR - period!

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Thanks a lot for responses, I couldn't ask for more.
Having both system is out of question for me,
But having a Canon mirrorless body may be an alternative.
And yes giving up on a 5D MIII is actually not easy, it's a great camera. I think I'll keep reading about the camera and try to find one to use it for a short time, so I'd have a better idea

Beware of reading specifications or fan posts for any camera. The real bottom line is how it works for you. Rent one, or buy from a place that allows returns if you don't like it.


There is little doubt that the ergonomics and menu's will seem strange, maybe awkward, but that's always the case when switching brands, you will get to know it well after using it a bit.

From what I understand, its a fine camera. The Nikon D7200 might be another camera to try out. It will likely have a better resale value, as well as a lot more lenses to pick from. It has a reasonable price as well.

I'm one who feels that I could pretty much get along fine with any camera, but I do use Canon's liveview, and have not personally experienced anything close to matching it. Nikon's version is pretty weak.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

XT-1 build quality and feel is nothing like a cheap A6000 or 70d. The Fuji is fully weather sealed with magnesium chassis. Dynamic range of those Fuji Xtrans Sensors is slightly better than the 5D but its ISO performance is a stop worse when scaled to the same size.

I think it's a good idea to have 2 systems. A large FF system and a small compact mirrorless system with a couple small compact primes.

+1, I have both systems and I found different situations/uses for both. My 5D3 continues to be my beloved camera, after leaving behind the 7D. I picked the Sony a6000 with some small lenses for travelling light, after waiting for an EOS-M camera with decent AF and variety of lenses, despite I can use an adapter for my Canon L lenses, but AF really dissapointed me.
If I were going to switch systems XT-1 is a terrific camera and Fuji has tremendous lenses and Sony is doing also a good job with the A7II and latest E-Mount lenses.

 

[alexanderferdinand]

Owning a 5D3, a 1D4, several L- Lenses, the magnificant RT- flash system; AND the Fuji X100s, a X- E2 with a few lenses:
sensors of the Fuji (its both times the X- trans II, so its one sensor...) are awesome.
handling the X100s in lowlight- a joy to use.
Using the 23/1,4: a wonderful glass, not cheap.

BUT: me as the back- button afficionado miss the AF- tracking for the quick action.
The small Fujis are wonderful to carry around, but cant beat the quick respond and allround qualities of the Canon-system.

Luckily I have both- so I notice every time I use a system, what are the differences.
Its a pleasure to have different tools.
Thought a while about trading in the Canon- system, but wont do it.

 

[mustafaakarsu]

After a long and careful consideration, I've decided not to switch my system. I've decided to get a carbon fibre tripod which would cut off 2 kilograms off my camera bag.
I got 3legged thing, Brian. 8)

 

[tomscott]

I don't get the too heavy too bulky thing yes it could be lighter but if it was the lenses wouldn't feel as good in the hand.

I've just traveled over 30,000 miles with my 5DMKIII, 24-105 F4 L, 16-35 2.8 L, 70-300mm L and the nifty fifty all adds up to around 7kg not including accessories and my 20kg backpack with clothes and supplies.

I don't think I could have had a better travel companion. The only thing I wish I had had was an extra 100mm on the 70-300 at times.

IQ brilliant
Ergonomics brilliant
FPS brilliant
Weather sealed brilliant
AF brilliant

There's not much more I could have asked of it! And 25k pics later with plenty of war wounds it's still shooting like a champ. Built for hard use and delivers.