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

[Loswr]

Canon has some beautiful classic cameras it could transform into an APS-C camera.

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...

 

[rbielefeld]

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.

This is my first post here, although I have been a reader for several years. I just had to respond. The final product, the image, is all I care about. I would use whatever body and lens necessary to capture the best images on the most consistent basis. Your statement does not take into account the myriad of different types of photography people are undertaking. There is no way the Fuji could capture the types of images I focus on obtaining as consistently as my current Canon gear. I shoot almost exclusively birds in flight. I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

 

[sanj]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.
[/quote]

Awesome photos. Do stick around, this forum is lots of fun. I would love to see more of your photos.

But everyone is not after flying birds.

 

[Orangutan]

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.

The herd mentality argument may apply for low-end gear, but it seems a stretch for more expensive gear. "Quality" is largely subjective, reflecting use cases, size, weight and balance of optical characteristics. E.g. I've seen a number of comments in this forum from people who love the optics of the 200-400L, but don't want to hassle with the size/weight, etc. The sales argument (as relates to non entry level gear) is the closest measure we have for whether lenses meet the needs of a large number of people. In that sense they do offer an approximation of "quality."

Another thought to consider: does Canon have a monopoly on marketing? Why are other companies unable to compete with Canon (sales figures) despite their superior products? I wish they would offer more competition so we consumers would benefit.

 

[rbielefeld]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Awesome photos. Do stick around, this forum is lots of fun. I would love to see more of your photos.

But everyone is not after flying birds.
[/quote]

Thanks, sanj. I will stick around. I realize not everyone is after flying birds, that is why I stated I cannot speak for anyone else but myself. However, there are a lot of us "Bird People" out here and we a lot of us use the big DSLRs because cameras like the Fuji just can't consistently capture the subject matter we are after.

 

[Loswr]

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

This is my first post here, although I have been a reader for several years. I just had to respond. The final product, the image, is all I care about. I would use whatever body and lens necessary to capture the best images on the most consistent basis. Your statement does not take into account the myriad of different types of photography people are undertaking. There is no way the Fuji could capture the types of images I focus on obtaining as consistently as my current Canon gear. I shoot almost exclusively birds in flight. I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Clearly shots like yours could easily have been captured with a Fuji XT1 and 27mm f/2.8 lens, if only you knew how to combine some skill and imagination. : : </sarcasm>

Seriously, welcome to the forum and thanks for sharing those amazing images!

 

[Maximilian]

This is my first post here, ...

Hello and welcome to the forum. Have fun in participating.

Quite outstanding pictures, esp. the "CACA flight with duck egg".
I really would like to see that one in higher resolution.
Maybe that's worth a second post in the BIF thread

 

[rbielefeld]

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

This is my first post here, although I have been a reader for several years. I just had to respond. The final product, the image, is all I care about. I would use whatever body and lens necessary to capture the best images on the most consistent basis. Your statement does not take into account the myriad of different types of photography people are undertaking. There is no way the Fuji could capture the types of images I focus on obtaining as consistently as my current Canon gear. I shoot almost exclusively birds in flight. I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Clearly shots like yours could easily have been captured with a Fuji XT1 and 27mm f/2.8 lens, if only you knew how to combine some skill and imagination. : : </sarcasm>

Seriously, welcome to the forum and thanks for sharing those amazing images!

Thanks, neuro. I do find this forum educational at times and often times very entertaining.

 

[rbielefeld]

This is my first post here, ...

Hello and welcome to the forum. Have fun in participating.

Quite outstanding pictures, esp. the "CACA flight with duck egg".
I really would like to see that one in higher resolution.
Maybe that's worth a second post in the BIF thread

Thanks Max...

 

[fragilesi]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Well I wish you had a Fuji XT-1 then your photos wouldn't be better than mine

Seriously, good photos! Do try out the BIF thread if you haven't already, they'd make great additions.

 

[sanj]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Well I wish you had a Fuji XT-1 then your bird/sports/wildlife photos wouldn't be better than mine

Seriously, good photos! Do try out the BIF thread if you haven't already, they'd make great additions.

 

[gsealy]

For me, it's not a matter of brand loyalty, and in this case, Fuji vs Canon. It's a matter of using a tool I feel comfortable with in a given situation. I own 7 (gulp!) Canon cameras and camcorders for doing still photography and video work. (And lots of lenses too.) Every one of them has a special place and use in my mind. When I plan for what I want to accomplish on a particular day then I configure my equipment for that purpose. I get myself into the goal knowing and feeling confident about what I am doing. I know my limitations and options. Looking ahead I am watching the 4K technology advances and doing research about the various product offerings. I might just buy a BMD URSA Mini or a Canon product, I don't know yet.

I bought a Fuji X100T because I like to do street photography for fun and the challenge of it. I noticed several photos on G+ that were shot with the X100 and X100S (I never knew anything about that camera previously). The photos just stood out for some reason. Then I read that this camera series is a favorite of lots of street photographers, many of whom are really well respected and known. So that got my interest going. I was using my t4i with the 40mm EF pancake because that was the smallest and least conspicuous configuration I could achieve. It produced good photos. But like many people the itch to try what other people were using successfully was too much to ignore. So I went for it. I am glad I did. I very much like the X100T for that particular situation over the t4i for a lot of reasons.

The thing I am saying is that I believe that using the right equipment for a given situation for a particular person is what it is all about. If you want to achieve the results you want, then it is really important to gather the tools to do that job, regardless of brand, and then feeling totally comfortable, knowing everything, and being excited about getting it done.

It is also healthy and not a disservice to Canon to discuss other brands in this forum. I find such discussions interesting and they round out my knowledge. I seriously don't think we have to be concerned about Canon's viability and future. They are not going anywhere. It is important to know though the limitations and product features they do have so that we can make logical and good choices for our needs. We are seeing Canon segment the market even further as evidenced by the new 5Ds and 5DsR cameras. At prices in the $3700 range we best make good decisions.

 

[distant.star]

This is my first post here, although I have been a reader for several years. I just had to respond. The final product, the image, is all I care about. I would use whatever body and lens necessary to capture the best images on the most consistent basis. Your statement does not take into account the myriad of different types of photography people are undertaking. There is no way the Fuji could capture the types of images I focus on obtaining as consistently as my current Canon gear. I shoot almost exclusively birds in flight. I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Happy to see my contributions to the discussion have dragged a good photographer and thoughtful poster out of the woodwork.

Nice images, and I hope you post a lot more. Thanks.

 

[fragilesi]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I "hang" with a big DSLR because it gives me the best opportunity to capture the images I am after.

Well I wish you had a Fuji XT-1 then your bird/sports/wildlife photos wouldn't be better than mine

Seriously, good photos! Do try out the BIF thread if you haven't already, they'd make great additions.

Scratches head . . .

 

[Keith_Reeder]

it doesn't matter how many units Canon sell, they still have an inferior sensor system that's now as much as 3 stops disadvantaged comparing the latest competition.

You've got that completely arse backwards.

It does matter how many units Canon sells, because it proves that what doesn't matter is this supposed sensor superiority, which is a "disadvantage" only in the minds of whiny malcontents on internet forums.

 

[distant.star]

It does matter how many units Canon sells, because it proves that what doesn't matter is this supposed sensor superiority, which is a "disadvantage" only in the minds of whiny malcontents on internet forums.

"Whiny malcontents," that's funny.

Pixelated: Why are you in prison, dog?

Fstop: Oh, that damn Canon, you know, homey.

Pixelated: You shot somebody?

Fstop: Yeah, I shot a lot of folks, but I told too many people my Canon wasn't working good enough. Other guys in the gang got pissed about it.

Pixelated: They rat you out?

Fstop: Yeah, damn judge gave me 25-to-life -- said I was a whiny malcontent and deserved it.

Pixelated: Damn, dog, with life you can't even get family visits!

Fstop: Yeah, thanks to Canon, I may never have sex again!

 

[sdsr]

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.

Really? While it's obviously the case that many like the images Fuji cameras make, I rather get the impression that the appeal of Fuji is rather heavily weighted towards the equipment itself, notably the somewhat retro, old-school-lots-of-external-controls, aesthetics of the camera bodies and how they feel and handle. From that point of view their appeal seems pretty obvious, and that's what made me want to like them too; but I didn't like the "final product", so I stayed with Olympus and Canon and added Sony instead.

I also think it's a bit misleading to suggest some sort of incompatibility between enjoying the equipment qua equipment and caring about the resulting images. I would have thought that enjoying using your equipment more results in better photos. It's certainly true in my case - much as I like the images my Canon and Olympus equipment let me make, most of the time I much prefer the process of using legacy manual lenses on mirrorless bodies, a process I find enjoyable in itself; and I think the results are better too. (Not for everyone, of course....)

 

[Loswr]

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.

Really? While it's obviously the case that many like the images Fuji cameras make, I rather get the impression that the appeal of Fuji is rather heavily weighted towards the equipment itself, notably the somewhat retro, old-school-lots-of-external-controls, aesthetics of the camera bodies and how they feel and handle.

Indeed. I initially let his irony slide, but since you bring it up, here's what Fuji has to say about their X-T1:

[quote author=Fuji]
The FUJIFILM X-T1 is a precision instrument, but one that's combined with a functional beauty.
...
In pursuit of classic styling and the age when cameras had their own unique refinements, a leading-edge, multi-layer coating has been added to the original FUJIFILM X-T1 body, creating a camera to thrill photographers with an eye for beauty.
[/quote]

I don't seem to recall Canon waxing poetic about the aesthetic beauty of their cameras. Canon puts multilayer coatings on their optics to improve the functionality, not on their camera bodies to improve their looks. :

So...who is pushing their cameras for the sake of the equipment not the results? Fuji. But as I stated previously, it's not exactly garnering them Canon's market share...

 

[distant.star]

.
I agree with you, sdsr. You have a good point that I've thought a lot about. Lots of folks are attracted to the Fuji cameras for aesthetics, "retro" nonesense, etc. I never pass a day without some stranger telling me what a good looking camera the X100S is. Since I'm a function over form type, I don't really care.

My conclusion about my observations are purely anecdotal. No meaningful conclusions can be drawn; it's solely what I believe I've seen. And I'm as aware as anyone that we humans generally see what we want to see. I don't think my opinion is worth a lot of discussion -- just one more potato in the stew.

Really? While it's obviously the case that many like the images Fuji cameras make, I rather get the impression that the appeal of Fuji is rather heavily weighted towards the equipment itself, notably the somewhat retro, old-school-lots-of-external-controls, aesthetics of the camera bodies and how they feel and handle. From that point of view their appeal seems pretty obvious, and that's what made me want to like them too; but I didn't like the "final product", so I stayed with Olympus and Canon and added Sony instead.

I also think it's a bit misleading to suggest some sort of incompatibility between enjoying the equipment qua equipment and caring about the resulting images. I would have thought that enjoying using your equipment more results in better photos. It's certainly true in my case - much as I like the images my Canon and Olympus equipment let me make, most of the time I much prefer the process of using legacy manual lenses on mirrorless bodies, a process I find enjoyable in itself; and I think the results are better too. (Not for everyone, of course....)

 

[distant.star]

.
Thanks, Big Brain, I appreciate you letting the irony slide. I initially caught a big break there! What a relief.

Seriously, you are stepping on weak footings quoting marketing BS, especially where Canon is concerned. They pay more people to pump out more ridiculous BS than anyone. Come to think of it, maybe there's a correlation between that and their market share!

Indeed. I initially let his irony slide, but since you bring it up, here's what Fuji has to say about their X-T1:

[quote author=Fuji]
The FUJIFILM X-T1 is a precision instrument, but one that's combined with a functional beauty.
...
In pursuit of classic styling and the age when cameras had their own unique refinements, a leading-edge, multi-layer coating has been added to the original FUJIFILM X-T1 body, creating a camera to thrill photographers with an eye for beauty.

I don't seem to recall Canon waxing poetic about the aesthetic beauty of their cameras. Canon puts multilayer coatings on their optics to improve the functionality, not on their camera bodies to improve their looks. :

So...who is pushing their cameras for the sake of the equipment not the results? Fuji. But as I stated previously, it's not exactly garnering them Canon's market share...
[/quote]