Picked up Fuji Xt1 - was blown away - where is Canon?

[koolman]

If you brought a Fuji and you are happy with it, that's fantastic. It is a good camera. The best camera is the one that best for you and your individual style of photography.

However, when you come here, a canon fan site, and make the post that you did, what kind of response did you anticipate?

It is BECAUSE I am a Canon fan - that I am frustrated - I feel my "team" is not reading the writing on the wall = the "rebel" consumers of the past - now want small light high quality bodies with premium prime options - that where designed for crops (not super expensive FF L lenses). High ISO and in camera processing are the way to go. Killer Auto WB and Colors that make almost anything look super. This seems to describe the competition !

 

[Loswr]

It is BECAUSE I am a Canon fan - that I am frustrated - I feel my "team" is not reading the writing on the wall = the "rebel" consumers of the past - now want small light high quality bodies with premium prime options - that where designed for crops (not super expensive FF L lenses). High ISO and in camera processing are the way to go. Killer Auto WB and Colors that make almost anything look super. This seems to describe the competition !

Yes, clearly you have your finger on the pulse of exactly what the "Rebel" consumers want, and as you aptly point out, that's precisely what Fuji delivers. That explains the meteoric rise of Fuji's market share. The way the numbers are trending, they'll eclipse Canon and Nikon sometime soon after pigs fly over snowbanks in hell.

 

[Dylan777]

If you brought a Fuji and you are happy with it, that's fantastic. It is a good camera. The best camera is the one that best for you and your individual style of photography.

However, when you come here, a canon fan site, and make the post that you did, what kind of response did you anticipate?

It is BECAUSE I am a Canon fan - that I am frustrated - I feel my "team" is not reading the writing on the wall = the "rebel" consumers of the past - now want small light high quality bodies with premium prime options - that where designed for crops (not super expensive FF L lenses). High ISO and in camera processing are the way to go. Killer Auto WB and Colors that make almost anything look super. This seems to describe the competition !

Keep in mind, Fuji lenses are NOT cheap compared to L lenses

 

[Marsu42]

Keep in mind, Fuji lenses are NOT cheap compared to L lenses

Good point there, switching to a rather exotic system should be considered unless you purchase a complete kit right away.

Personally, I'd rather go for a system with other advantages than mainly the sensor and gimmicks - i.e. Pentax with superior sealing - or a brand that has the usual suspect's 3rtd party products (i.e. Nikon or Sony with Sigma and whatnot).

 

[Finn M]

Keep in mind, Fuji lenses are NOT cheap compared to L lenses

Fuji lenses are actually cheap compared to Canons L-lenses.
I own both a Canon EOS 5D mk.III for work and a Fujifilm XT-1 for family use. For Fuji I own three lenses: Fuji XF 56/1,2 and XF 23/1,4 which are less than half the price (and also less than half the weight) to the Canon EF 85/1,2L and EF 35/1,4L. I also own both the Fuji XF 10-24/4 OIS and Canon EF 16-35/4L IS which are about similar in price.

Both Canon and Fuji produce brilliant lenses, but it is something special to get back the aperature ring on the lens: it gives me flashback to Canons FD lenses, it is simply fantastic for manual use. Both cameras have their strenghts and weaknesses, but I'm surprised to say that I'm using the Fuji camera more than I thought I would. The Canon camera is now used only when I'm going to make big enlargements at work.

But the new Canon EF 100-400/4,5-5,6L IS II is a beauty: very sharp and a very effective stabilizer (IS). The best I have ever used!

 

[applecider]

I just did a night photography workshop and two of the six participants were using the xt1. There images we're surprisingly good. I used a 5Diii and also an SL 1 which I really like. For hiking especially at night the lighter gear has some appeal. Of course carrying L lenses defeats the light weight idea.

I'm hoping the next SL1 has a one stop better high ISO sensor and a bit more DR so it meets or beats the fuji. Unfortunately arches national park was cloudy for the three nights I had there.

 

[distant.star]

That explains the meteoric rise of Fuji's market share. The way the numbers are trending, they'll eclipse Canon and Nikon sometime soon after pigs fly over snowbanks in hell.

By that logic, the cheeseburger at a four-star restaurant will never be as good as a cheeseburger at McDonalds because of sales numbers. Mercedes automobiles will never attain the soaring heights of Toyota. One day soon the world will recognize the value and dominance of mediocrity.

My observations the past year suggest people who are moving to Fuji are heavily weighted toward images, i.e. the final product is more important that the equipment. People hanging with the big DSLR sellers seem to value equipment more for equipment sake. As I've said before it was a tough pill to swallow when I realized my $5k Canon setup (lens & body) was producing less pleasing results than my $1300 Fuji X100S. The folks seriously interested in photographs will never equal the volume of gadget collectors.

 

[Loswr]

That explains the meteoric rise of Fuji's market share. The way the numbers are trending, they'll eclipse Canon and Nikon sometime soon after pigs fly over snowbanks in hell.

By that logic, the cheeseburger at a four-star restaurant will never be as good as a cheeseburger at McDonalds because of sales numbers. Mercedes automobiles will never attain the soaring heights of Toyota.

It depends on how you define good. Toyota automobiles have gotten more people to and from work so they can feed their families than Mercedes automobiles.

My observations the past year suggest people who are moving to Fuji are heavily weighted toward images, i.e. the final product is more important that the equipment.

I shoot small birds from distances >30 feet. I shoot architecture in urban settings where an ultrawide FoV, orthogonal perspective and lack of keystoning are important. I care about the final product. What Fuji camera and lenses should I use?

 

[Dylan777]

That explains the meteoric rise of Fuji's market share. The way the numbers are trending, they'll eclipse Canon and Nikon sometime soon after pigs fly over snowbanks in hell.

By that logic, the cheeseburger at a four-star restaurant will never be as good as a cheeseburger at McDonalds because of sales numbers. Mercedes automobiles will never attain the soaring heights of Toyota.

It depends on how you define good. Toyota automobiles have gotten more people to and from work so they can feed their families than Mercedes automobiles.

My observations the past year suggest people who are moving to Fuji are heavily weighted toward images, i.e. the final product is more important that the equipment.

I shoot small birds from distances >30 feet. I shoot architecture in urban settings where an ultrawide FoV, orthogonal perspective and lack of keystoning are important. I care about the final product. What Fuji camera and lenses should I use?

Not only lens selections, ergonomic should also be considered as well. I do enjoy shooting with a7 and small primes, but can't stand their FE zooms. The balance is off.

 

[distant.star]

It depends on how you define good. Toyota automobiles have gotten more people to and from work so they can feed their families than Mercedes automobiles.

I shoot small birds from distances >30 feet. I shoot architecture in urban settings where an ultrawide FoV, orthogonal perspective and lack of keystoning are important. I care about the final product. What Fuji camera and lenses should I use?

You're the one who defined "good" -- sales volume. Now you want to change that? Now it's total number of pictures taken by DSLR cameras vs number taken by mirrorless?

Given your needs, I suggest you do not use Fujifilm cameras and lenses. Just keep doing what you're doing, and you'll be quite happy.

 

[dpc]

My observations the past year suggest people who are moving to Fuji are heavily weighted toward images, i.e. the final product is more important that the equipment. People hanging with the big DSLR sellers seem to value equipment more for equipment sake. As I've said before it was a tough pill to swallow when I realized my $5k Canon setup (lens & body) was producing less pleasing results than my $1300 Fuji X100S. The folks seriously interested in photographs will never equal the volume of gadget collectors.
[/quote]

I find the above quote rather condescending. I own a Fujifilm X100. I also own a 5D Mark II and a 7D with assorted lenses for both. The Fuji files are very, very good indeed (I only shoot RAW). So are the Canon files. I'm interested in the cameras for what I can do with them. You shouldn't assume that anyone "hanging with the big DSLR sellers seem to value equipment more for equipment's sake." That is decidedly not the case with me and I rather doubt it is true of many other photographers. Different people favour different camera systems for different reasons. Frankly I find this thread rather pointless. It reminds me of a hamster spinning in its wheel. It's moving after a fashion but isn't going anywhere. 8)

 

[privatebydesign]

My observations the past year suggest people who are moving to Fuji are heavily weighted toward images, i.e. the final product is more important that the equipment. People hanging with the big DSLR sellers seem to value equipment more for equipment sake. As I've said before it was a tough pill to swallow when I realized my $5k Canon setup (lens & body) was producing less pleasing results than my $1300 Fuji X100S. The folks seriously interested in photographs will never equal the volume of gadget collectors.

What a condescending load of garbage. What happens when you want a different fov than your X100S gives you? That your image creation is so small minded is not our issue, I'd wager there is nothing you can do with your $1,300 X100S that I couldn't do with my $200 EOS-M and 22mm either.

If your image creation is limited to a fixed lens rangefinder then all power to you, a Canon DSLR is not the tool best suited for you, they were 50 years ago when they made cutting edge rangefinders, but most of us have moved on a little since then and find far broader imaging possibilities in systems with much greater flexibility and options.

 

[distant.star]

.
I seem to have struck a nerve.

Opinions vary.

 

[Loswr]

You're the one who defined "good"

Actually, I didn't. You are the one who brought "good" into the discussion, and now your attributing it to me? Canon's position as market leader means their products meet the needs of more people then products from their competitors, whatever those needs are. We each decide what products best meet our own needs, and we define "good" for ourselves. There's no objective way to define good or best, but unit sales can be counted.

Personally, I take pictures with gear made by the dSLR market leader. As for the fast food market leader, I've probably had three of their cheeseburgers in my life, and the most recent was ~30 years ago.

 

[sanj]

Thank you all for your feedback. I first wish to clarify that - no - I am not a "troll" out to create some kind of empty discussion.

My post expressed frustration - at how what I perceived as a "toy" (the fuji) produced such outstanding jpg's.

I understand that the Fuji jpg's are "cooked" - but for many of us who just want to shoot and use the out of camera jpg - this is certainly fine. The canon can have a "cooked" mode - or a "real" mode - and the user can choose.

My comments by the way - did not refer to the business of marketing and selling cameras - in which Fuji is way way behind canon - as canon is a full system that is time tested and been in place for many years.

You are not a troll.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Keep in mind, Fuji lenses are NOT cheap compared to L lenses

Fuji lenses are actually cheap compared to Canons L-lenses.
I own both a Canon EOS 5D mk.III for work and a Fujifilm XT-1 for family use. For Fuji I own three lenses: Fuji XF 56/1,2 and XF 23/1,4 which are less than half the price (and also less than half the weight) to the Canon EF 85/1,2L and EF 35/1,4L. I also own both the Fuji XF 10-24/4 OIS and Canon EF 16-35/4L IS which are about similar in price.

Both Canon and Fuji produce brilliant lenses, but it is something special to get back the aperature ring on the lens: it gives me flashback to Canons FD lenses, it is simply fantastic for manual use. Both cameras have their strenghts and weaknesses, but I'm surprised to say that I'm using the Fuji camera more than I thought I would. The Canon camera is now used only when I'm going to make big enlargements at work.

But the new Canon EF 100-400/4,5-5,6L IS II is a beauty: very sharp and a very effective stabilizer (IS). The best I have ever used!

I love canon lenses and own some "L" lenses but, I also have a tiny Sony a6000 when I don't want to carry the FF+lenses for family trips. If I want to get high quality glasses for my Sony I have to pay big premiun and price of some Sony-Zeiss lenses are almost the same as Canon counterparts. If your bet is for mirrorless, what you are saving is weight because the cheap lenses (for mirrorless) are not yet offering high quality.

 

[Aglet]

I shoot small birds from distances >30 feet. I shoot architecture in urban settings where an ultrawide FoV, orthogonal perspective and lack of keystoning are important. I care about the final product. What Fuji camera and lenses should I use?

any of them, if you combine some skill and imagination

 

[sanj]

You're the one who defined "good"

Actually, I didn't. You are the one who brought "good" into the discussion, and now your attributing it to me? Canon's position as market leader means their products meet the needs of more people then products from their competitors, whatever those needs are. We each decide what products best meet our own needs, and we define "good" for ourselves. There's no objective way to define good or best, but unit sales can be counted.

Personally, I take pictures with gear made by the dSLR market leader. As for the fast food market leader, I've probably had three of their cheeseburgers in my life, and the most recent was ~30 years ago.

Not to me. I feel sales figures do not reflect quality. Sales figures do reflect consumer's herd mentality to buy what is selling, the advertising, the placement of the product in shops; the sales person's easy way out. Note: Am not saying Canon is bad. No no. Am saying this about sales figures in general. I would be the last consumer to believe a product is great because of numbers sold. A rebel is not better than 1d because it sells more. Canon is not better than Nikon because it sells more. Nikon is not better than Fuji because it sells more.

And am glad you not eating the bad for health, bland burgers. Me neither. During filming sometimes we have to have a quick meal on the roads and unit rushes to get these burgers. I starve.

 

[stefang]

Fuji lenses are actually cheap compared to Canons L-lenses.
I own both a Canon EOS 5D mk.III for work and a Fujifilm XT-1 for family use. For Fuji I own three lenses: Fuji XF 56/1,2 and XF 23/1,4 which are less than half the price (and also less than half the weight) to the Canon EF 85/1,2L and EF 35/1,4L. I also own both the Fuji XF 10-24/4 OIS and Canon EF 16-35/4L IS which are about similar in price.

That may be true, but from an optical perspective, the 56/1.2 must be compared to the 85/1.8, the 23/1.4 to the 35/2.0 and the 10-24/4 to an imaginary 16-35/6.4.

 

[Hector1970]

While Fuji don't seem to be expanding that much in terms of sale they are producing very good equipment.
The form factor is nice and compact and relatively light.
They produce very good lens.
Their menus are a pain, the thing you want is usually buried in the menu.
The XTi and the X100s are pretty cameras.
They are using design to get higher prices for their gear than a comparitive Canon.
I've no idea if they are profitable doing what they are doing.
I think they have found a nice niche though.
Their cameras are nice to work with. I like the Optical View Finder they have.

Canon are clever and know their market.
Beautiful but expensive cameras they must reckon won't be as profitable as their current APS-C models.
Canon has some beautiful classic cameras it could transform into an APS-C camera.
I'd love if the modelled some of the lens on classic style lens to with an aperture ring.
I personally like the way Fuji have incorporated this in the X100s.

What got Canon here may not keep Canon on top.
They have to evolve and find new niches.
As technology makes cameras cheaper and advances start to peter out design will be an important factor in the future.
There will be a premium for beautiful looking cameras with good design, small form and good glass.
Hopefully Canon will make a thing of beauty one day or they may have worked out already it won't pay for them.