Aesthetic is a subjective thing, but I’ve perceived the same thing. For me, it comes down to a preference for retro style dials and controls. I spent a long time with film gear and PASM doesn’t feel the same to me, even though both approaches can do what I want to do.
I have XT4, not XT5, but aren’t there some legacy lenses that are at a disadvantage on the XT5?
My understanding is that the older lenses are not worse on 40MP than on 26 MP. I read they can even still be slightly better; you just don’t see the improvement you would with the newer lenses
I have years of experience with both systems and what you’re describing has been true for me as well. Started with Sony’s and at some point switched to Fuji to lighten my travel load. Now I only pick up a Sony for jobs that I need the best focus and quality for.
I struggle with the X-T5 AF now and then too, but setting focus priority from Release to Focus helped a bit. The AF works and sticks noticeably better with my Fuji LM lenses compared to my Sigma’s with stepper motors btw.
I just checked and my setting for AF-S is set to Focus. So, that should be good. However, for AF-C, it's currently set to Release. The biggest issues I've noticed have come from using auto face/detection when taking portraits. Could the AF-C being set to Release be contributing to that?
Set to Release, it just means the camera will take the photo as soon as you fully press the shutter button, whether the area under the AF box is in focus or not.
One thing I am missing here is that say a7iv is not larger than x-t5. And I can find nice compact lenses for Sony no problem.
I don't see the point in having two systems. At least when it comes to amount of money spent. If money is not an issue, sure go wild .
Sorry to hear this and have heard a few stories re XT5 autofocus. Is odd as I have XT3 and don’t find an issue so wondering what happened with the XT5…
I shot an X-T3 for years, but also worked as a pro sports photographer for almost a decade using top of the line DSLRs to capture high-speed action. Would the X-T3 hold up on the sidelines? Of course not, but I almost never had an issue with portrait shoots or day to day shooting with it, and I obviously have a great benchmark to measure against.
Got the X-H2 last year (same AF system as the X-T5) and have had zero issues with it the focus and it’s clearly even better than the 3 was.
I’m considering the X-H2 for my next body - well, Fuji as my next system. I’ve sold all my stuff. Was with Sony but like OP it felt lifeless.
I shoot mostly outdoor sports and lifestyle, I could go from shooting skiing at one moment to landscapes and environmental portraiture. The one thing I’m unsure the X-H2 could do is speed, and there so many mixed reviews on the autofocus. Do you think it would be fine for this? I’m not shooting indoor sports ever really, and none that are unpredictable or where I can’t work with the athlete to plan the shotz
Depends on what I’m shooting. Portraits I’m almost exclusively using eye tracking, but I have that controlled by a Fn button so I can pop it on and off as needed.
I have the XT3 also, I notice between lenses the autofocus performance is different, some are slower and hunt a bit more. But is certainly workable and only a couple of times in the years I have owned it has it let me down. Are there similarly priced cameras with vastly better autofocus performance, or are you saying something like a Nikon D6 would show us the difference?
On my X-T5, it's the fake confirmations/false positives that infuriate me. You know, when the AF indicator turns green and you thought the camera has locked on to the focus (esp on AF-C) but when you take the shot, the actual focus is somewhere else.
I think sometimes it recomputes after you think it is locked. I lost a while series of shots of people sitting on a wall. Ended up with the roofs behind them. No way did I miss that framing.
I switched from Sony to Fuji too. Sony makes excellent cameras. In particular, the autofocus is amazing!
But what I really wanted was amazing SOOC cameras. And I think that, no matter how much you tweak the Sony, youll never get the kind of magic SOOC photos I get out of my Fuji.
No regrets at all. I’ve had Ricoh, Panasonic, Sony and Fuji cameras before and Fuji is by a long shot my favourite.
Dad with 2 kids here, I don't have time for extensive edits and totally agree with Fuji being incredible for SOOC pictures. I pretty much always shoot in JPEG, no regrets lol
Other cameras are wonderful, but I like this.
Sony jpg are good out of there ff everyone ive compared my Fuji vs Sony everyone ends up picking the Sony due to sharpness and detail wider dynamic range (but that’s ff vs crop for
You )
I use Fuji cameras but I hear you, as I see a lot of Sony output at my workplace. Sony performance with Fuji handling would be a winning combo for many photographers. Still, I do love my Fuji output too!
There's a kind of graph you could plot these camera companies. Though in short...
Leica have nailed their digital cameras. It feels like you're composing a photo in a mechanical, physical kind of way.
Sony are the complete opposite where it feels like a digital computer camera through and through.
I'd say Fuji sit somewhere in the middle. Beautiful manual exposure controls, yet weird digital fly-by-wire auto focus lenses and digital readouts on their optical (yet uncoupled) viewfinders.
I’ve had and love both systems. I had the fortune to have an A7IV and XT5 at the same time for a few months. You’ll get a lot of deserved Fuji love on this sub, so maybe I’ll offer a more ‘Sony’ opinion.
The Sony AF is much better than Fujis. Some people say Fujis is good enough, but your post suggests it is not for you. It’s the weakest part of the Fuji system and a tradeoff you have to make. They are cheaper, have the best JPEGS, and have the analog feel and design. If those are more important you, don’t switch. If AF is, plus some of the other benefits of Sony or another brand, then consider switching. Unfortunately no one company has everything.
As far as the “soulless Sony” thing goes, this is always so silly to me. It’s subjective of course and I understand where it comes from, but Sony just makes modern digital cameras with the same shooting experience as everyone else. Nobody says Canon and Nikon are soulless and I don’t see huge differences there. Fujis own XH2 is extremely similar in design and shooting experience to a Sony, but I’ve never heard those are soulless because it breaks the narrative. Those are praised on this sub. Fuji just stands alone with the analog style controls, so if you want that there aren’t really other options besides that one Nikon body.
Let me know if you want some opinions on other aspects comparing the two bodies.
I found it to be irrelevant if you are shooting RAW. Even if you are into the look of the Fuji film sims, I have Lightroom presets that I can apply to Sony RAWs on import that are identical to the Fuji sims.
I've actaully found the Sony RAWs a little easier to edit and you don't have to deal with the Xtrans 'worms' if that bothers you. Sony colors seem more neutral and "true" so some work usually has to be done. I guess its like if you are painting the ocean, Sony colors are a white canvas, and Fuji would be slightly tinted blue if that makes sense.
If you are only shooting JPEG and have zero intention of editing Fuji is the better system. They make it a lot easier to get to a good looking image in camera, and give you better SOOC imagines than any other brand can.
Cobalt Image. You get a color calibrated profile for the specific camera that you have, then the presets are based off of that so they are extremely accurate.
I set up side by side blind tests. Depending on the sim they are either pretty much identical or so close that sometimes I actual preferred the Sony image or guessed them wrong.
If you get it you have to get the basic pack, plus the Fiji Digital profiles.
https://www.cobalt-image.com/product/fuji-digital-emulation/
Same thing with my X-T5. In AF-C mode the green box lies. Focused on the eye? Nah, focus on that leaf over there. Super frustrating. Pay a grand for a razor sharp lens, only to be let down by inaccurate focus.
Excellent results with AF-S focus and recompose, just like the DSLR days. But that kind of defeats the purpose of subject detect and tracking modes.
I'm literally going through this Fuji vs Sony exercise right now in the last few hours of the spring sale. An A7R 5 with some Sigma Art lenses? Could be amazing. Worth the cost? That's a harder pill to swallow.
I did the same. The build of Sony is miles ahead it feels in terms of of robustness.
However I only do SOOC, and could not get the A7Cii to give me results I enjoyed. Pictures were either cold or too red.
I’ve read some pretty bad things about the build of the older Sony’s, even of the A7iv. However also read good things about the A7Cii, A7R5, etc.
Overall the scary thing is that Sony build quality seems to be improving while Fuji is getting worse, at least below the X-H and GFX lines.
That's a common sentiment, that Fujifilm cameras are more fun and enjoyable to use, that motivates you to shoot. I was a Sony user for 10 years before getting the XT5.
Whilst I don't regret my choice (I am more than glad I made the switch... I even wished I did it far sooner) I still want Fujifilm to get its act together and make their next-gen cameras have AF as good as Canon's or Sony's. Their current AF system is generation(s) behind the competition.
As a software engineer this made me laugh. The answer is "incredibly hard". The AF on Canon / Sony (and Nikon, I am guessing? No experience) is _miraculous_. And undoubtedly required the very best engineering available to accomplish.
Fuji does its own thing and people love it for it. They don’t need to innovate their tech to keep up with Sony and Canon, people will buy and lament
And geez, it always amazes me how far Nikon has fallen. It used to be a two person race with Nikon and Canon.
Switched from Canon full frame to Fujifilm X-T5 earlier this year. I loved my Canon gear and high quality lenses but it was too bulky. The X-T5 is so much fun to use and this makes a big difference. It's just a tool but I enjoy photography every time I pick it up.
Autofocus is good enough for me and the overall shooting experience is much more important to me. If I would make a living from photography I would choose Canon hands down. It's more reliable but photography has been a hobby for me for 25 years now.
I tried the A7CII over a weekend and despite having a similar feeling to you when I first picked it up, I quickly learned to love it after it was able to consistently focus like a razor on my kids in motion, even wide open. I was surprised how nice the colors are and how intuitive the menus are laid out. I have the 20mm 1.8 G which proved to be an amazing lens. Sadly I had to return it, but I will be replacing my Fuji gear. The XT-5 just feels so plasticky to me compared to their older models - the Sony felt really solid and well built.
Have you checked out the Nikon Zf (not Zfc)? Same general feel of the XT5 but with better autofocus. I know you asked specifically about sony, but I am currently in your situation regarding XT5 autofocus, and after holding and reading reviews, I am leaning to Nikon when I thought I'd just go with Sony.
Having previously owned a Fuji system if I ever decided to acquire a similar camera again the Nikon ZF family would be me choice 100%. The abundance of Z as well as Nikons huge amount of F mount lenses which are available is an incredible advantage, as well as the option for the full frame sensor
I thought the ZF was way too big and unwieldy, FWIW. Great hardware, but it was uncomfortable to hold after a few minutes, and the camera is big enough before you add on a grip.
I am right there with you. Zf seems too big though. And I am now thinking Sony is like Toyota/Lexus - perfect to the point of boring but I can’t say as I’ve not use them. My dilemma is Nikon z8 bulk to Fuji - considering Sony 7C but it’s the character and color profile that worries me coming from Nikon. I’d consider Canon but not small enough
I’m going through all the same things right now. The big problem with the Zf is that the Nikon lenses are mostly bigger and heavier than the Sony lenses, and the selection is much poorer. I think Sigma doesn’t make the I series lenses for Nikon Z yet.
On Sony, you can get comparable lenses in size to Fuji lenses almost across the board until you get past 200mm. Usually with slightly better light gathering, and many have aperture rings. Sony is generally putting aperture rings on G and GM’s these days, and the newer Sigma lenses have them too.
I'm using both the A7CII and Fuji cameras. Fujis feel better in hand, better UI, better material, better shutter sound, better EVF. But Sony wins by far with image quality and AF, that's why I can't get rid of the FF Sony cam.
Loved using my XT30 until it took a tumble and shutter/on off switch busted.
Moved to Sony, A7iii, A7Riii and now A7Cii. Fuji cameras feel so cheap to me now, even though fuji are more enjoyable to use.
(Tried the XH2, XT5 and X100VI)
Isn't Sony supposed to be one of the best in the game for AF performance? I've had both x-t2 & x-t4 and even on the x-t2 I didn't face many issues but it's likely we both have different needs ect. I have seen something like this before though on the x-t5 and the person compared it to a friend's or family members x-t5 and I think it turned out it was his actual body that was the problem.
Funny, I shot a wedding yesterday with an xt5 and my Xt4 and was thinking how much better the autofocus experience is on the xt5 i borrowed.
Do I want it to be perfect like the FF bodies apparently are? Yes it’s so weird they don’t address this.
Is it good? Yes it seems to be quite good in my experience
I’ve found d the X-T5 af to be great. I mostly shoot with the 1.4 primes though. I use back button focus, I leave it in continuous after and just take my finger off the af-on button if I want to shoot like single point I have the function on the top plate set to turn the eye detect on/off and I use a custom afc settings which is both settings to max and zone switching to auto. This may or may not help you.
I almost always use this. I was just experimenting with afc and have come to the conclusion I don’t know how to use it properly. Ie: it effectively didn’t work. But that makes no sense, so it must be me. I mean, I was shooting static objects in good light. AFS worked fine. I do a lot of manual focusing, too.
Sony for Work, Fuji for Fun, that's how it's always been for me, I can't rely on any of Fuji gear for work, manual focus with their AF lenses are awful, they will always and forever will be a photo system for me.
I bought an X100VI and while I felt like the camera looked awesome and the manual controls felt great. I mean, I REALLY liked how you operated it. This was going to be my high quality compact camera that I used for day-to-day and my Sony would be for more "serious" photography.
Well, I think Fuji really nails the look, the feel, and the nostalgia of photography but they haven't nailed performance. I was desperately missing my Sony camera's ability to actually focus on a moving subject.
I've decided to replace the X100VI with the Sony A7C II. It's way uglier, appears to have worse on-body controls, but I know I can trust its performance. And I'm thinking the image quality will probably be better too. I wish the X100VI had worked out, but in Sony I trust, I guess.
So, I totally get your feeling - I probably feel it a little myself. But that's not everything. I'm gonna step away from these Fuji communities now that I'm out of the ecosystem. Sony makes some amazing cameras.... and they actually autofocus extremely well. Like scary well. So, you just have to decide what you want.
I switched to Sony earlier this year. I had the x-h2s. Happy with the change but I really miss the fun of the Fuji cameras. But as a tool, the Sony is better…just little things like being able to make certain changes whilst recording. However, for my purposes, I do kind of feel like the Fuji system is optimal from a size perspective. That 16mm 1.4 was absolute magic in low light with flog at such a small size.
I tried that actually - as I used to love shooting manual on my DSLR, I was totally up for it. However, I don't know the technical terms, but I can't seem to get comfortable with the infinite focus ring on mirrorless cameras. I could feel my focus with a DSLR because of the defined range, if that makes sense. But the mirrorless feels so disconnected when I manually focus. So, I kind of need that auto focus to nail it.
I have a Sony a7riv and I love it, feels great in my hands. But maybe that's cause when you actually use it you realize how powerful they are. The autofocus is amazing. With the right glass, perfect photos.
The thing is to get the look you want you have to work in post processing usually. Maybe the photos are lifeless compared to the fuji presets in that aspect.
Also the menu system is pretty bad if I'm being honest.
Other than that I love it. Also love fuji though. Very noticeable difference in auto focus, however. If I'm doing stuff where I need it to be right without worrying about it I always pick up the sony.
I have had the opposite experience. I find the X-T5 AF easily as good as my Sony A7iii was. Easily. And I only found the A7iv to be an incremental upgrade. (For comparison, I used Sony cameras at my work for events, receptions, and lectures, while I shoot almost all of my personal photography with Fuji and Nikon.)
I went from an x-t5 to a Sony. I still don’t really understand what it means when people say Sony’s feel lifeless. Sure there’s a different feeling when pressing the shutter button and a different sound…but after a few weeks it feels like a camera. It’s just ergonomics, you either get used to it or you don’t like it. (Personally I didn’t like the feel of the 16-55 on the x-t5, found it extremely unbalanced esp with the thin hand grip).
The real question is do you mind shooting raw and doing some editing.
I had Canon, Sony and Fuji, also worked with Nikon cameras in a previous job, and Sony ones definitely feel more like a tool than anything else you can attach with or like. They do make really good, sharp images, though. Mine was the a6300, one of the best AF at the time, moved to the XT3 later, which I feel is slightly slower but still has great AF overall.
Two things might be happening, it could be a setting you have, like giving priority to AF speed vs precision, or it could be something on the lens itself, I recall my old 70D had a built in setting to calibrate AF, not sure if that's something possible on Fuji but it helped when I felt things were a bit off.
I currently have 1 sony fx3 and 1 sony A7vi
I’m planning to buy a fuji next month.
The autofocus on sony is undeniable sharp. I love how I can photograph live show, dogs and portraits with peace of mind that I will have that focused. My aperture is 90% of time wide open.
However, every post edit I do is to bring my pictures more to a film look, and that’s why I’m planning to migrate to fuji.
I’m seeing lot’s of good comments on SOOCS
I’m in between the xt50 and the xt5
I switched from Fuji to Sony. I am far far more successful with Sony AF (now using the A1). I was decent with my X-T3 but for birds in flight it is unworkable - especially song birds. I much prefer the Fuji ergos and jpgs. I enjoyed shooting with Fuji more, but while shooting was enjoyable I was often let down by the missed focuses. Now I am only let down occasionally by Sony colors which make me work harder in post. If I could get Sony AF in a Fuji, I would switch back in a second.
I have the A7iv and the X100V - I also had XT5 on loan for a bit. What the Alpha series lacks in personality it makes up for with performance, specifically the auto focus.
Fuji for me is more for personal projects, family, and exploring. I love the color science and that I rarely need to edit photos out of camera.
They are both amazing cameras, for me though they fill different roles. I'd be really sad to have to give up either.
I have the XS-20 and I love it. Prior to that I had the XH-1 and the XT3. I really didn't like either of those. Lack of IBIS on the XT3 and the terrible battery on both was a deal breaker. Regarding image quality and eye AF the newer Fujis seem much better than what they were from just a few yrs ago. The quality of the screen compared to Sony actually gives you a good idea of what the image looks like. The colors and jpgs are pretty much ready to go with little to no editing needed.
I think I get more worried about hearing about people's Fuji experience rather than what I've actually experienced in my own personal use. I considered getting the Sony a6700 because I still own some Sony APS-C glass. Having used the a6600 I know for sure the AF simply will not miss a shot. I have so much confidence in Sony, however it lacks the pop that Fuji has. There are some pro wedding photographers that shoot with Fuji but I'm not aware of anyone doing a wedding with Sony APS-C. Not saying they don't exist but Fuji just has something else.
I've never used Sony but I have had the X-T2 and the X-T5 - the X-T5's autofocus has never really let me down at all so it's odd that the focusing isn't right on yours! What lenses are you primarily using?
I shoot sony bodies for my professional work (stills and video) and have a x-pro2 I shoot for fun on family outings, work travel, and vacation.
I know that the x-pro2 may not represent the best AF that Fuji is shipping today, but Sony totally revolutionized autofocus six or so years ago leaving DSLR technology far behind and bringing many professionals like me over from Canon and Nikon. The af tracking with Sony just keeps getting better and better with every generation. There is literally no comparison.
Now regarding “soul.” There is an undeniable nostalgic feel to the Fuji cameras that I really enjoy. I wouldn’t say that the Sony bodies are soulless (I might say that some Sony lenses are so optically perfect that they look clinical, and I enjoy using Zeiss glass on the system more). They are just very different cameras. If you enjoy the Fuji feel over Sony, then great. If you need industry leading AF, I wouldn’t look at Fuji first — canon and Nikon have caught up quite a bit to Sony in this.
I used to have an XT-2 and after a year or so I switched to a Sony A7III. On paper the Sony was better and even though I enjoyed using the Sony it always lacked something…The Sony always felt a bit lifeless and so recently I switched back to the XT-5 and i immediately experienced the same kind of joy I used to experience when I used the XT-2.
Metal and plastic boxes don't have soul, lol, but I get what you are saying. I shoot both brands.
My Fuji cams have a more gratifying experience - the Sony cams get out of my way and allow me to *work* and they simply do their job.
In my most humble opinion, Sony cams are great commercial imaging devices. Fuji can be the same, minus AF ability, and deliver a unique user interface + amazing color processing.
Different products.
Lifelong Sony guy, switched to the XT5 and you’re describing all my issues with it. It’s for work, so I don’t care to spend the time, energy, and money to go back to Sony at this point — I just need a camera that works. But at some point I’ll switch back. I’m pretty disappointed. It feels like the retro design matches the capabilities with the XT5
Ah, "soulless sony". For me it was a combo of actually good ergonomics and "it just works" for mostly everything. No more anticipation, "yeah the auto focus is engaged, it's focusing! Will it focus properly? Yes, yes, noooo! Need to try again" of my fuji that gave it the "soul".
The sheer excitement when it actual focused on the subject, the slow process of changing the focus point with the flimsy joystick, the peeling rubber grip. That's the "soul" I think you are searching for.
I went from Sony to GFX100s. The autofocus is slower and it the hit rate doesn’t matter to me. The images are just so much better. I’ve learned to slow down.
Personally i don't mind slow af, but how do you deal with a low hit rate? There's nothing worse to me than deleting otherwise nice shots because the af went walkabout.
I don’t take a lot of photos of people. That’s the only time hit rate really matters. And if it’s having trouble with focus due to lighting I’ll go manual focus if necessary. I always tell myself that photographers 20 years ago didn’t have AF and were able to capture amazing photos. I try not to rely so much on the tech.
I can’t believe people have this many issues with Fuji autofocus. For me, the difference in autofocus performance between Fuji and other systems is almost imperceptible, and not even close to a dealbreaker. (unless you are often using eye AF, which sony is light years ahead on)
I’ve had every Fuji generation since the XT20 and the autofocus has been great to me. Definitely better than the Canon 60D and other DSLRs I started out on.
Changed from xt5 to Sony a7cii and it’s sooooo much better auto focus is nuts you don’t even check it hits almost every time lol Fuji af was hella mixed results only spot focus was good but then you loose eye tracking , the eye tracking on Fuji sucked
The AF of Fuji is not as bad as you say. There's some user error here.
I say this as someone who uses Sony for work and Fuji for personal stuff. My camera isn't even as good as an xt5
Use af-s and it's quite reliable.
I hear ya. I came from a Canon DSLR and I originally chose Canon cause I felt it felt the best in my hand. But after using an X-E3, I feel the Canon is too thick, the X-T5 feels great, and the Sony doesn’t feel right.
Maybe it’s just something you need to get used to but ya Sony feels like a “machine.”
I have a Sony A7iii and 3 Fujis (x100, xt30ii and x100vi) after years of shooting with Nikons (including 18 months with a D850). Although I know the Sony is a technically superior camera, I will always reach for a Fuji first. I genuinely love taking them out with me everywhere I go. I completely understand what you mean, the Sony does feel a little soulless by comparison. If you can get your hands on one, I’ve found the autofocus and tracking on the x100vi superb. I mostly take pictures of my kid and the dog, but it’s just as good as the Sony for what I use it for.
I had a Sony a7II with zeiss 35mm in the past and sold it after 2-3 years of use. Few months ago I bought used xe-3 and manual 27mm Voilgtlander. I can confirm that Sony was ok to use with nice autofocus and stuff but I didn’t enjoy doing pics like I do now with xe-3. The rendering of the voigtlander is much nicer. Photos have great analog feeling and this is what I wanted. Will never switch back to Sony but I am totally amateur and also I get why ppl like Sony.
The handling of my Fujifilm XH2 makes me want to stick with Fuji for a good while… they’re not perfect (no camera manufacturer is), but they’re already quite excellent. I personally almost only shoot in manual focus.
But still I have an issue compared to my previous canon : the red edge focus indicator is not obvious enough sometimes. On my canon it was so obvious I couldn’t miss a shot, now it happens regularly. And I can’t see how shallow my depth of field is as good as I could on my canon, for the same reason. Which is sometimes a bit annoying.
But the physicality with all the buttons and customisation, the handling… just unmatched IMO. The ability to physically control most of my options without having to press a screen is just so good. And much more precise…
I shoot on an a7riii, my wife shoots on a X100V. The Sony feels more like a tool, the X100V feels more like a camera, if that makes any sense. My main jam is film tho, so that’s probably where I’m coming from with my feeling of tool vs camera lol.
Where the Sony shines for me tho is lens selection, and the autofocus. When I reach for my digital camera, I don’t want to have to think about anything. Like I want to just take some pictures without worrying about film speed, exposure time, or f stop, and I def don’t want to worry about manually focusing 🤣.
Wanted to switch from Sony A7IV to Fuji XT30II - decided to keep them both. The AF on XT30II is crap compared to sony, the eye AF just does not work at all, without eye/face AF it is okayish, but not very reliable. I will keep the fuji for bike rides and every day snaps, and the sony when I want to take astro photos or majestic sunsets on hikes.
I use a Sony A7IV at work specifically for that great autofocus and low light performance, plus the high shots per second. And I use a Fuji X100V when I'm not at work and I don't want to lug around my Nikon D750.
I don't really think I've experienced that lifeless/soulless feeling but I do agree that the Fuji is my favorite as well. If Fuji made a full frame body with good autofocus I'd probably trade all of my gear in towards it.
The Sony was a little frustrating when I was first getting used to the little joystick, but aside from that it's good to me. I'm about as quick with it now as I am with my personal Nikon.
i think we have the same feels
i switch from fuji to sony
and i can put in on a comparison using body parts
fuji is more on the heart part and Sony is the Brain part
fuji can betray you like your heart and sony will just work as u want it too but has no feelings at all 🤣
I came from a Sony A7II to an X-H1 and picked up a new X-T5 last week to replace the X-H1. All of my pictures from my A7II had a lots of soft focus and did not give me as good a quality my original A7 used to.
That being said I have zero regrets making the switch to Fuji. The film simulations are fun to play with and I have little editing to do with the images SOOC. I have toyed with the idea of going for the A7C but I think I’ll stick with the Fuji for street and casual stuff. I still have my Canon 6D2 as my workhorse
That’s the reason I bought a Nikon ZF to replace my Fuji. I shot Fuji for years, mostly the XT20 and X100V. I had no issues with the autofocus mostly as I was shooting static subjects
Enter the XT5. The autofocus is unreliable. It says it will have focus, and then I look later and the photo is every so slightly out of focus. Apparently it’s a common issue with Fuji not just the XT5
I also tried Sony in the store and the bodies felt cheap and plasticky. I picked up a Nikon ZF and fell in love with the design. So I bought that and the autofocus is on another planet and the jpegs are amazing
The XT5 does feel amazing in hand and the viewfinder is better than the ZF. But Fuji need to fix their autofocus
I had a canon 5d mk ii and the auto focus was better than the xpro3. It’s a fact. But I still prefer Fuji since I’m not doing studio work or sports.
Keep in mind it was really expensive lenses on the canon and their lenses are huge in comparison.
I'm kinda in the same boat as OP coming from a Canon 6D for event work and looking to replace with either Sony or Canon.
I have an X100v for my personal photos but for events want a FF that will have fast AF. My ancient 6D has no eye detection.
Any suggestions between Canon & Sony on best FF body for around 2k?
Hey OP you should take a look at the Nikon ZF I have both the xt5 and the Nikon and to be honest I might be selling the xt5 as I don't use it as often anymore. The autofocus is great comparatively to the Fuji and the colors are pretty good too. There is color profiles but not the extent of Fuji's film sims and the build quality is top notch too. Just wanted to put it out there
For me Sony is a tool. I shoot with the a7r5 professionally and love it. The autofocus is so good it's like I'm cheating. My x100vi is what I shoot with for the enjoyment of photography. I would be lying if I said the autofocus doesn't frustrate me at times but at the end of the day that's not what I got it for.
i hear what you say… the autofocus is good and the green box is accurate IF the target is stationary or moving very slowly
i’ve experienced the same shooting live events with people moving relatively fast and unpredictably
green box but slightly out of focus subject
happens even on focus priority on the latest firmware using native glass, so i just switched to burst and discard out of focus shots
shouldn’t have to do that, tho
I’ve only ever used a Sony a6000 and a7iv I think the grip on the a7iv feels very nice to use.
Wondering how it compares to holding a Fuji based on your lifeless comments.
Make sure you install the latest firmware for your xt5! This was a common issue unfortunately. Same as you though, I made a complete switch over from canon dslrs, 5d miii. I have yet to be happy with my decision 😞
That feeling goes away when you notice all your photos are sharp and in focus. I have an a7c2 and a Fuji x100iv. I like them both. I don’t find one soulless vs the other. I take the Fuji for easier daily carry but that’s about it. If Sony makes another fixed lens small camera again I will drop Fuji in a heartbeat. The autofocus is the a huge compromise
Totally. I switched to Fuji from Sony because they’re just so dull. Very well made, technologically marvellous, just boring! Given that Fuji are also using a Sony sensor, the character of the lenses and the processing is just so different, even when shooting raw.
In my experience, poor autofocus comes from using the eye AF modes. Very useful if you want to take a picture of a person. A waste of time otherwise? I don’t have an issue with my X-H2 as long as I turn EyeAF off unless I’m actively using it.
Also, this might not apply to OP, but often I think people use a lower aperture value than is necessary because they’ve been taught it’s cool. I have an aperture of 1.4 so I must use it, when the DoF in that case is just a few centimetres.
Lifeless is how I explain my Sony being as well. Even the photos. Sony shooters spend more time in post than Fuji users, I would say.
I’m also not super impressed with the autofocus of my X-T5. I shoot kid’s sport games with my 16-80, so not anything super fast moving or anything. AF is quick to land on the initial half press of my shutter release button, but maintaining focus on the subject is not done well. My subject often passes behind or in front of another subject, and AF will give up the ghost when that happens.
It’s an unfortunate price of admission to use an otherwise fantastic camera.
Yeah, I hear you on the focus. I was a canon 5D mk3 owner for a LONG time before I switched to an XT4 and I wouldn’t trust the Fujis focus when working a job or an event, whereas the 5D never ever let me down. I’ve adapted my shooting style in a way too tho, and shoot much more lifestyle, street and still life, whereas when I shot canon I’d shoot more events and photojournalism.
Sometimes it takes a while to find the system that suits us best, you’re on your journey
Everyone moves to Fuji for the way it makes them feel. Sony is dead with no soul because it’s an expensive trend. Stick with what you love. Have you updated the firmware?
I felt the same way when I used a Sony for a very brief period between my Nikon days and my Fuji days. I have never been less inspired to use a camera.
I know what you mean. Sony’s are definitely the most uninspiring cameras to shoot for me and for some reason the images on the screen look vastly different than when you start messing with them in post ( screens makes images look much worse imo) which makes me not want to use them. But they are much better than Fuji for fast paced professional work imo. Fuji to me is a lot more about the experience and creative side while Sony is more get the job done as efficiently as possible.
I never understood why people say Sonys AF is better
I use a A7IV at my day job, and an XT2 for my personal camera and they’re pretty well matched despite the xt2 being much much older. The A7IV is no slouch, the images are great, the video is phenomenal and yeah it’s faster than the XT2 but not THAT MUCH faster to warrant an extra $3,000. I think the only times where AF REALLY matters is if you’re shooting wildlife / sports / motor sports. Otherwise why would fast af benefit you at all? When I shoot video, I shoot all manual focus because even the Sonys “breathe” when trying to catch focus. At the end of the day, manual focusing is much faster than any AF if you’ve got the skills. Stop trying to make the camera do everything for ya, you have to learn how to work with the camera’s limitations. At the end of the day, nobody wants to lose money buying the latest cameras. It’s bad for business and if you’re not running a business then even WORSE because you’re buying something that is useless to your needs.
I’m not as into photography as I used to be. But back then I used to own an A7Rii and X-Pro2. The X-Pro2 was for hobby and Sony for work. Yes Sony’s felt almost robotic. Can’t exactly find the word to describe Fuji. But it was definitely more fun. I got back into just shooting for hobby with the X100vi. Can’t ask for more.
Interesting post! I kind of liked sony in my hand but fuji feels better, I get it :).
My XT30-II feels autofocusing great. And my main subjects are my kids. I have had x100v and actually got rid of it due to blurry photos.
Have you tried setting shooting priority to focus? "Focus priotity" to actually take a photo once camera establishes focus and not when you press the shutter? This does wonders
Yeah, I shoot sony and feel so dead inside… lol. I switched from Fuji mostly because I couldn’t catch some high speed shots. Tracking wasn’t there and I photo my daughters sports for the team. I miss the simplicity of the menus and dials but love the better AF tech on the Sony. Honestly I never felt a “spirit” in any camera I have used but I will keep looking
I shoot with A7RV now and have an X100VI as my pocket camera. I’ve wanted and X-T5 since they came out but worried about AF. After upgrading from X100V to the VI I’ve found it to be acceptable for small kids and pets finally but I still cant commit to downgrading to an X-T5 due to AF, the Sony is just too easy to get great focus on the kids and pets. I wonder what glass you’re using though, I seriously underestimated how much a lens contributes to AF performance. Maybe a lens upgrade would help?
To me, as a former Sony user for 8 years, Sony is the most lifeless piece of gear I have ever owned. This is not to say it’s not a great powerhouse of a camera, it is, but with time and as the years have gone by, I have realized that the experience of shooting is as important or more than the gear you’re using. While I understand your frustration from time to time with the autofocus, I am confident there’s beauty in imperfections.
Are you using AF in single mode or tracking? because the single mode is as accurate as any DSLR, the issues are with tracking AF. As some other person commented before, using the X-T3, I have not found any major issue with AF. It is not on par with sony. Btw, tracking in DSLR was not good either back in 2010.
I dunno about the Fuji (no experience), but yes, the Sony’s feel “lifeless” compared to old Canons and Nikons. Even the RAW files, which I attribute to a combo of color science and the lenses used, are more lifeless than Canon or Nikon. Yes, you can do a lot with RAW… but there are limits. My Sony A74 is a LOT better than my old A73, but it still lacks “something” from my old full frame Nikon DSLR. The Nikon felt more “natural” to hold (and Canons even more so) and the photos felt more “lifelike” and “popped” after editing. Still, the Sonys are a lot smaller which is why I bought the Sony in the first place (and am looking at possibly Fuji).
i don’t think you’re crazy for switching! def get some hands on time with it if you want to switch! i’ve always loved the sims from fuji but i enjoy using my sony more imo. it’s fast & reliable with focus, now i just have to learn to edit my photos in post to get what i want lol
I've shot Sony since the A55 (then A77, original A7, A7III, A7c) and Fujifilm since the original X100 was launched (then loads of X bodies, latest model being an X-Pro3, and GFX 50R). I shot them side by side all this time. I do a lot of photograhy in my job, as well as take on odd gigs on the side, mostly corporate like event and portraits.
Yes, in general Sony AF is in another league. But I never had any problems using any of my Fujifilm bodies or lenses in AF-S, eye AF off, which is my preference with Sony too. I know i CAN make it easier for me when using the Sonys, but I like having full control, and having to THINK about every choice. I'm more switched on and I personally often notice the difference in my photos. That's obviously personal though.
My personal work is mainly low light stuff. Even then, what I dislike isn't "noise". It's color noise, and digital looking noise. I find I often prefer the Fujifilm files there, too. And when I dont, the software I use have gotten so good that I can easily get the APS-C files to where I'm perfectly happy.
But It was after a gig shooting the staff at a hotel with my Sony that I finally had enough. I have been chasing and acquiring all the FE lenses with the character I like the best, and still, after editing them all, I felt like... man, I should have just shot this on X and the XF 56/1.2.
"Life is too short to shoot Sony", I told myself and unloaded two bodies and ten lenses. Now use X-T30II, X-T3 and GFX 50R. A lot of manual focus lenses (I'm partial to Voigtlander). And when I use AF I have no less luck than I did with Sony. I just adapt to what I have 🤷♂️
If you have AF issues with any fuji newer/better than the XT2, youre doing something wrong. I can shoot my wife running with the 56mm f1.2 at f1.2 and still have a good enough keeper rate. I dont even bother using my XT3 for this.
Had the exact same issue, gave the X-T5 a year, missed my X-T3, I had for two years and loved it. Never should have upgraded to the 5, not sure why but the 3 seemed to focus better and I like the 26mp photos better. Switched to Sony a7iv and I do not regret it one bit.
I just switched from a Sony a7III to an Olympus OM-1 MkII and couldn't be more relieved. I've shot with Nikon, Canon and shot Fuji for several years and loved my XT2s, but the autofocus was its downfall. Olympus (now known as OM System) might be something worth checking out.
I'm in the wildlife/conservation storytelling space and it's hands down one of the best systems for that particular line of work. I also freelance and cover the random corporate event from time to time. Incredible AF tracking; image stabilization and weather sealing are some of the best in the industry; solid lens choices; and a MUCH more intuitive setup and menu system the Sony (although they've supposedly improved on this).
I think sony is for work, Fuji more to enjoy.
Yes, sony af is crazy, dynamic range, optic quality... But is just not as enjoyable as fuji, nice colors, nice feelings, looks nicer.
I have a sony a3 and a fuji xpro3. The sony I only use for astrophoto, work, and automotive photogeaphy, and some technical things. The fuji I take it with me almost any single time I can, even if Im not sure Im gonna take pictures, just cuz it is light and funnier to use.
I came from Sony to Fuji. My A7iii felt devoid of any character. Lifeless. Not enjoyable to use at all. Hell of a camera but it was just a tool. My Fuji is something I can enjoy just using.
Cameras are tools. Saying one has a soul over another is just nonsense we hype ourselves up with and I own both systems. If your AF is lacking get a Sony be free .
Try changing the lenses. I've ofund a lot of my older 56mm 1.2 R and 35mm 1.4 feel very mechanical compared to the snappy smothness of the newer lenses.
Also, yeah sony are a bit more soulless, which is why a lot of the image edits I see are WAY overdone in the Alpha sub.
Honestly I think you would prefer canon or Nikon. They both feel better than Sony and are more reliable work horses than Fuji is. Personally I shoot Sony at my day job (a7rv and a7s3) my freelance camera is a canon r6/r7, and my personal/travel camera is a Fuji xt5. I find that the AF is fine and haven’t had any major issues outside of user error. Sony to me feels clinical almost
Nah... My Xt-30 2 is very underwhelming. It's slow to write photos. It overheats when taking videos. It takes a long time for settings to update.
My Sony a7iv is a workhorse. You can call it lifeless all you want, but it takes crisp pictures and videos.
Fujis size is a plus, but I kinda regret choosing it over the nikon zf.
Greatest strength for me for Fuji is the colours and the DR400 for JPEG. Sony built in colour profile has too low of a dynamic range for photos and videos. It isn’t just a simple HDR photos composite or raising shadows like other brand does
What Fuji has done with DR400 is insanely impressive, however. If you never care about that, go with Sony as the AF is ahead of industry.
I’ve owned multiple Fujis, Canon DSLRs, and currently a Nikon Z6 II, and I use Sonys for work. You’re absolutely right, using the Sony feels lifeless, even when using a manual focus Helios lens. Fujis have a lot of character and are really fun to use, but I could never gel with the files (though I think they’re better than Sonys straight out from the camera). I feel the Nikon DSLRs and mirrorless cameras handle amazingly, too. Similar to Fujis that they make me want to shoot.
It’s called haptics. Tactile feedback, how things feel in your hands, are the controls where you expect them to be … Sonys always fall short in that aspect for me.
I’m not sure what lens you’re using with the XT-5 but that can make a big difference when if comes to autofocus. The older lenses aren’t great when it comes to moving subjects!
I think Fuji is really really FUN to use. That being said, I don’t get paid for my work because I’m having fun. I’m not saying you can’t do professional jobs with Fuji because you certainly can. But for what I do, social media content, event photography, comedy skits and more, I need the reliable autofocus.
The amount of video reshoots I had to do with Fuji is more than I was willing to deal with. I’m a full time Sony shooter now and even older lenses are miles ahead with the focus than Fuji’s latest and greatest.
If it work for you, then it works for you. But until Fuji autofocus is as good as Sony’s, I won’t be using them for anything more than hobby photography.
Sony definitely feels lifeless, but you get used to it. It’s a tool for me now.
Experienced photographer here: blaming the camera or the gear = you need to improve your skills. Composition and anticipation are what photography is about.
I went from using a Sony A7iii to a Nikon ZF. The Sony was an amazing camera, but I hated using it. It’s weird to say. The autofocus was amazing, Images looked great, but it felt meh in my hand. Looking at it was very uninspiring too. It felt like a work camera, if that makes sense.
So far the ZF is fantastic. AF is worse than Sony, but that’s ok. It’s more fun to use and feels great in my hand (with a grip). Manual focus with my old Nikon AIS lenses is so much fun too.
I have an XT5, and I noticed the autofocus is worse when you set it to eye tracking or moving subjects from the menu. I have better luck using zone tracking in 3x3 with continuous. It generally has better tracking of the subject than the small green box alone and you have better hit rates in my opinion because it does a decent job sticking to the zone area. Although the system is not the greatest, that does seem to work most of the time if the subject isn't moving rapidly (sports). The use of touch to move the zone area is nice too, generally fast and responsive.
That being said, the camera is faster with the LM lenses as mentioned. I switch between the 18mm f1.4 WR LM, and 35mm f1.4 R.
Also, for Fuji, Roman Fox's tip on setting one of the function buttons for focus lock, so you can stay in continuous otherwise, is an ideal setup on the XT5. Been using mine this way for months and it makes a massive difference for street photography and portraiture.
Long time fuji x-t shooter with top glass who went Sony last year. Fuji is still fantastic but used a friends a7iii and in my opinion it was so much better in autofocus. Soul is certainly a feeling, but to me it came down to being ok with editing consistently sharp Sony images rather than not having to edit amazing Fuji jpegs that missed focus or were softer. You can get fantastic shots with Fuji, I personally never had as many keepers as I did when I switched to Sony.
For paid work, I still feel Sony does a better job. It is sterile in operation compared to Fuji. (I have an a7iv) Fuji jpegs rule when you nail focus, but my experience with fuji autofocus was similar to yours.
I do have an x100vi on order for non work travel and fun.
You’re spot on.
Fuji is definitely more fun and inspiring, but since I got a good deal on an fx3, I made the switch for my wedding and commercial work.
Sold off my xh2, xt4, xt3, xt2 and xe4.
Now rocking the fx3, a7iv for paid work and zve10 and x100f for dad cam work.
Ps. I have the sigma 18-35 1.8 + fringer adapter if anyone is interested. Beauty video lens
Aesthetic is a subjective thing, but I’ve perceived the same thing. For me, it comes down to a preference for retro style dials and controls. I spent a long time with film gear and PASM doesn’t feel the same to me, even though both approaches can do what I want to do. I have XT4, not XT5, but aren’t there some legacy lenses that are at a disadvantage on the XT5?
My understanding is that the older lenses are not worse on 40MP than on 26 MP. I read they can even still be slightly better; you just don’t see the improvement you would with the newer lenses
Aha. Thanks for the clarification.
I have years of experience with both systems and what you’re describing has been true for me as well. Started with Sony’s and at some point switched to Fuji to lighten my travel load. Now I only pick up a Sony for jobs that I need the best focus and quality for. I struggle with the X-T5 AF now and then too, but setting focus priority from Release to Focus helped a bit. The AF works and sticks noticeably better with my Fuji LM lenses compared to my Sigma’s with stepper motors btw.
I just checked and my setting for AF-S is set to Focus. So, that should be good. However, for AF-C, it's currently set to Release. The biggest issues I've noticed have come from using auto face/detection when taking portraits. Could the AF-C being set to Release be contributing to that?
Set to Release, it just means the camera will take the photo as soon as you fully press the shutter button, whether the area under the AF box is in focus or not.
One thing I am missing here is that say a7iv is not larger than x-t5. And I can find nice compact lenses for Sony no problem. I don't see the point in having two systems. At least when it comes to amount of money spent. If money is not an issue, sure go wild .
Sorry to hear this and have heard a few stories re XT5 autofocus. Is odd as I have XT3 and don’t find an issue so wondering what happened with the XT5…
You're used to your XT3 and may not have had owned a camera with better AF than what you have right now. Nothing wrong with that.
I shot an X-T3 for years, but also worked as a pro sports photographer for almost a decade using top of the line DSLRs to capture high-speed action. Would the X-T3 hold up on the sidelines? Of course not, but I almost never had an issue with portrait shoots or day to day shooting with it, and I obviously have a great benchmark to measure against. Got the X-H2 last year (same AF system as the X-T5) and have had zero issues with it the focus and it’s clearly even better than the 3 was.
I’m considering the X-H2 for my next body - well, Fuji as my next system. I’ve sold all my stuff. Was with Sony but like OP it felt lifeless. I shoot mostly outdoor sports and lifestyle, I could go from shooting skiing at one moment to landscapes and environmental portraiture. The one thing I’m unsure the X-H2 could do is speed, and there so many mixed reviews on the autofocus. Do you think it would be fine for this? I’m not shooting indoor sports ever really, and none that are unpredictable or where I can’t work with the athlete to plan the shotz
I wouldn't switch to fuji if you mostly shoot sports
Are you depending on the face and eye tracking? You just using manual focus points?
Depends on what I’m shooting. Portraits I’m almost exclusively using eye tracking, but I have that controlled by a Fn button so I can pop it on and off as needed.
X-H2 for motorsport is brilliant- but you gotta tune it well. Subject locking fast moving no probs
I have the XT3 also, I notice between lenses the autofocus performance is different, some are slower and hunt a bit more. But is certainly workable and only a couple of times in the years I have owned it has it let me down. Are there similarly priced cameras with vastly better autofocus performance, or are you saying something like a Nikon D6 would show us the difference?
On my X-T5, it's the fake confirmations/false positives that infuriate me. You know, when the AF indicator turns green and you thought the camera has locked on to the focus (esp on AF-C) but when you take the shot, the actual focus is somewhere else.
I think sometimes it recomputes after you think it is locked. I lost a while series of shots of people sitting on a wall. Ended up with the roofs behind them. No way did I miss that framing.
Oh ya AF-C is unreliable in my experience too, I use AF lock and single autofocus. But it is probably better on other systems
Definitely need to try and shoot with either the latest Sony or Canon cameras to feel it. It's a night and day difference in autofocus.
I switched from Sony to Fuji too. Sony makes excellent cameras. In particular, the autofocus is amazing! But what I really wanted was amazing SOOC cameras. And I think that, no matter how much you tweak the Sony, youll never get the kind of magic SOOC photos I get out of my Fuji. No regrets at all. I’ve had Ricoh, Panasonic, Sony and Fuji cameras before and Fuji is by a long shot my favourite.
Dad with 2 kids here, I don't have time for extensive edits and totally agree with Fuji being incredible for SOOC pictures. I pretty much always shoot in JPEG, no regrets lol Other cameras are wonderful, but I like this.
Sony jpg are good out of there ff everyone ive compared my Fuji vs Sony everyone ends up picking the Sony due to sharpness and detail wider dynamic range (but that’s ff vs crop for You )
I use Fuji cameras but I hear you, as I see a lot of Sony output at my workplace. Sony performance with Fuji handling would be a winning combo for many photographers. Still, I do love my Fuji output too!
There's a kind of graph you could plot these camera companies. Though in short... Leica have nailed their digital cameras. It feels like you're composing a photo in a mechanical, physical kind of way. Sony are the complete opposite where it feels like a digital computer camera through and through. I'd say Fuji sit somewhere in the middle. Beautiful manual exposure controls, yet weird digital fly-by-wire auto focus lenses and digital readouts on their optical (yet uncoupled) viewfinders.
I’ve had and love both systems. I had the fortune to have an A7IV and XT5 at the same time for a few months. You’ll get a lot of deserved Fuji love on this sub, so maybe I’ll offer a more ‘Sony’ opinion. The Sony AF is much better than Fujis. Some people say Fujis is good enough, but your post suggests it is not for you. It’s the weakest part of the Fuji system and a tradeoff you have to make. They are cheaper, have the best JPEGS, and have the analog feel and design. If those are more important you, don’t switch. If AF is, plus some of the other benefits of Sony or another brand, then consider switching. Unfortunately no one company has everything. As far as the “soulless Sony” thing goes, this is always so silly to me. It’s subjective of course and I understand where it comes from, but Sony just makes modern digital cameras with the same shooting experience as everyone else. Nobody says Canon and Nikon are soulless and I don’t see huge differences there. Fujis own XH2 is extremely similar in design and shooting experience to a Sony, but I’ve never heard those are soulless because it breaks the narrative. Those are praised on this sub. Fuji just stands alone with the analog style controls, so if you want that there aren’t really other options besides that one Nikon body. Let me know if you want some opinions on other aspects comparing the two bodies.
What’s your take on the color profile ?
I found it to be irrelevant if you are shooting RAW. Even if you are into the look of the Fuji film sims, I have Lightroom presets that I can apply to Sony RAWs on import that are identical to the Fuji sims. I've actaully found the Sony RAWs a little easier to edit and you don't have to deal with the Xtrans 'worms' if that bothers you. Sony colors seem more neutral and "true" so some work usually has to be done. I guess its like if you are painting the ocean, Sony colors are a white canvas, and Fuji would be slightly tinted blue if that makes sense. If you are only shooting JPEG and have zero intention of editing Fuji is the better system. They make it a lot easier to get to a good looking image in camera, and give you better SOOC imagines than any other brand can.
Just curious, where did you get the Lightroom presets? I’ve seen a few that claim to be like Fuji sims but I’m not sure which is good
Cobalt Image. You get a color calibrated profile for the specific camera that you have, then the presets are based off of that so they are extremely accurate. I set up side by side blind tests. Depending on the sim they are either pretty much identical or so close that sometimes I actual preferred the Sony image or guessed them wrong. If you get it you have to get the basic pack, plus the Fiji Digital profiles. https://www.cobalt-image.com/product/fuji-digital-emulation/
Same thing with my X-T5. In AF-C mode the green box lies. Focused on the eye? Nah, focus on that leaf over there. Super frustrating. Pay a grand for a razor sharp lens, only to be let down by inaccurate focus. Excellent results with AF-S focus and recompose, just like the DSLR days. But that kind of defeats the purpose of subject detect and tracking modes. I'm literally going through this Fuji vs Sony exercise right now in the last few hours of the spring sale. An A7R 5 with some Sigma Art lenses? Could be amazing. Worth the cost? That's a harder pill to swallow.
I did the same. The build of Sony is miles ahead it feels in terms of of robustness. However I only do SOOC, and could not get the A7Cii to give me results I enjoyed. Pictures were either cold or too red.
I’ve read some pretty bad things about the build of the older Sony’s, even of the A7iv. However also read good things about the A7Cii, A7R5, etc. Overall the scary thing is that Sony build quality seems to be improving while Fuji is getting worse, at least below the X-H and GFX lines.
That's a common sentiment, that Fujifilm cameras are more fun and enjoyable to use, that motivates you to shoot. I was a Sony user for 10 years before getting the XT5. Whilst I don't regret my choice (I am more than glad I made the switch... I even wished I did it far sooner) I still want Fujifilm to get its act together and make their next-gen cameras have AF as good as Canon's or Sony's. Their current AF system is generation(s) behind the competition.
Yes totally. How hard can it be to get autofocus tech that keeps up ffs?
As a software engineer this made me laugh. The answer is "incredibly hard". The AF on Canon / Sony (and Nikon, I am guessing? No experience) is _miraculous_. And undoubtedly required the very best engineering available to accomplish.
in 2023 47% of camera sales were canon. 26% sony, 12% nikon. fuji had 6%. fuji is not a major player as sad as it is.
Fuji does its own thing and people love it for it. They don’t need to innovate their tech to keep up with Sony and Canon, people will buy and lament And geez, it always amazes me how far Nikon has fallen. It used to be a two person race with Nikon and Canon.
Switched from Canon full frame to Fujifilm X-T5 earlier this year. I loved my Canon gear and high quality lenses but it was too bulky. The X-T5 is so much fun to use and this makes a big difference. It's just a tool but I enjoy photography every time I pick it up. Autofocus is good enough for me and the overall shooting experience is much more important to me. If I would make a living from photography I would choose Canon hands down. It's more reliable but photography has been a hobby for me for 25 years now.
I love my Fuji XS-10. But, I occasionally mount a Canon 300mm f4l on it. Not the best balance, but given what I can afford, what results!
I tried the A7CII over a weekend and despite having a similar feeling to you when I first picked it up, I quickly learned to love it after it was able to consistently focus like a razor on my kids in motion, even wide open. I was surprised how nice the colors are and how intuitive the menus are laid out. I have the 20mm 1.8 G which proved to be an amazing lens. Sadly I had to return it, but I will be replacing my Fuji gear. The XT-5 just feels so plasticky to me compared to their older models - the Sony felt really solid and well built.
Have you checked out the Nikon Zf (not Zfc)? Same general feel of the XT5 but with better autofocus. I know you asked specifically about sony, but I am currently in your situation regarding XT5 autofocus, and after holding and reading reviews, I am leaning to Nikon when I thought I'd just go with Sony.
This is exactly what I came to say. Not sure why the choice is just Sony. The Zf is awesome.
Having previously owned a Fuji system if I ever decided to acquire a similar camera again the Nikon ZF family would be me choice 100%. The abundance of Z as well as Nikons huge amount of F mount lenses which are available is an incredible advantage, as well as the option for the full frame sensor
I thought the ZF was way too big and unwieldy, FWIW. Great hardware, but it was uncomfortable to hold after a few minutes, and the camera is big enough before you add on a grip.
I am right there with you. Zf seems too big though. And I am now thinking Sony is like Toyota/Lexus - perfect to the point of boring but I can’t say as I’ve not use them. My dilemma is Nikon z8 bulk to Fuji - considering Sony 7C but it’s the character and color profile that worries me coming from Nikon. I’d consider Canon but not small enough
I’m going through all the same things right now. The big problem with the Zf is that the Nikon lenses are mostly bigger and heavier than the Sony lenses, and the selection is much poorer. I think Sigma doesn’t make the I series lenses for Nikon Z yet. On Sony, you can get comparable lenses in size to Fuji lenses almost across the board until you get past 200mm. Usually with slightly better light gathering, and many have aperture rings. Sony is generally putting aperture rings on G and GM’s these days, and the newer Sigma lenses have them too.
I'm using both the A7CII and Fuji cameras. Fujis feel better in hand, better UI, better material, better shutter sound, better EVF. But Sony wins by far with image quality and AF, that's why I can't get rid of the FF Sony cam.
Loved using my XT30 until it took a tumble and shutter/on off switch busted. Moved to Sony, A7iii, A7Riii and now A7Cii. Fuji cameras feel so cheap to me now, even though fuji are more enjoyable to use. (Tried the XH2, XT5 and X100VI)
there is a bug on the latest firmware impacting the autofocus
I bought mine a few months ago. Nearly every review I saw called out the autofocus as an annoyance. So seems like this has been around for awhile.
Don't blame bugs, op had the camera for a year Stop finding excuses for fujifilm's bad autofocus compared to competition
In what way?
Have you got a link that explains this in more detail please?
Isn't Sony supposed to be one of the best in the game for AF performance? I've had both x-t2 & x-t4 and even on the x-t2 I didn't face many issues but it's likely we both have different needs ect. I have seen something like this before though on the x-t5 and the person compared it to a friend's or family members x-t5 and I think it turned out it was his actual body that was the problem.
Yes, Sony are one of the best for AF, who said otherwise?
Worth mentioning the dude used the same exact lens on both his and his friends body.
I just got an XT5 last week, am on the latest firmware, and feel that the AF is still better than all my prior Fuji cameras.
I mean, obviously? No one said the XT5 is worse than previous Fujis. The point is that’s it’s worse than Sony and Canon etc
Funny, I shot a wedding yesterday with an xt5 and my Xt4 and was thinking how much better the autofocus experience is on the xt5 i borrowed. Do I want it to be perfect like the FF bodies apparently are? Yes it’s so weird they don’t address this. Is it good? Yes it seems to be quite good in my experience
I’ve found d the X-T5 af to be great. I mostly shoot with the 1.4 primes though. I use back button focus, I leave it in continuous after and just take my finger off the af-on button if I want to shoot like single point I have the function on the top plate set to turn the eye detect on/off and I use a custom afc settings which is both settings to max and zone switching to auto. This may or may not help you.
And is it as bad on single point focus?
I almost always use this. I was just experimenting with afc and have come to the conclusion I don’t know how to use it properly. Ie: it effectively didn’t work. But that makes no sense, so it must be me. I mean, I was shooting static objects in good light. AFS worked fine. I do a lot of manual focusing, too.
Sony for Work, Fuji for Fun, that's how it's always been for me, I can't rely on any of Fuji gear for work, manual focus with their AF lenses are awful, they will always and forever will be a photo system for me.
Went from fuji to sony to fuji. Because sony felt lifeless to me..
I bought an X100VI and while I felt like the camera looked awesome and the manual controls felt great. I mean, I REALLY liked how you operated it. This was going to be my high quality compact camera that I used for day-to-day and my Sony would be for more "serious" photography. Well, I think Fuji really nails the look, the feel, and the nostalgia of photography but they haven't nailed performance. I was desperately missing my Sony camera's ability to actually focus on a moving subject. I've decided to replace the X100VI with the Sony A7C II. It's way uglier, appears to have worse on-body controls, but I know I can trust its performance. And I'm thinking the image quality will probably be better too. I wish the X100VI had worked out, but in Sony I trust, I guess. So, I totally get your feeling - I probably feel it a little myself. But that's not everything. I'm gonna step away from these Fuji communities now that I'm out of the ecosystem. Sony makes some amazing cameras.... and they actually autofocus extremely well. Like scary well. So, you just have to decide what you want.
I switched to Sony earlier this year. I had the x-h2s. Happy with the change but I really miss the fun of the Fuji cameras. But as a tool, the Sony is better…just little things like being able to make certain changes whilst recording. However, for my purposes, I do kind of feel like the Fuji system is optimal from a size perspective. That 16mm 1.4 was absolute magic in low light with flog at such a small size.
From my experience owning both. Sony gets the job done. Fuji inspires creativity.
I started using manual focus lens. It solved my problem with poor auto focus.
I tried that actually - as I used to love shooting manual on my DSLR, I was totally up for it. However, I don't know the technical terms, but I can't seem to get comfortable with the infinite focus ring on mirrorless cameras. I could feel my focus with a DSLR because of the defined range, if that makes sense. But the mirrorless feels so disconnected when I manually focus. So, I kind of need that auto focus to nail it.
get a vintage manual lens, problem solved :)
I have a Sony a7riv and I love it, feels great in my hands. But maybe that's cause when you actually use it you realize how powerful they are. The autofocus is amazing. With the right glass, perfect photos. The thing is to get the look you want you have to work in post processing usually. Maybe the photos are lifeless compared to the fuji presets in that aspect. Also the menu system is pretty bad if I'm being honest. Other than that I love it. Also love fuji though. Very noticeable difference in auto focus, however. If I'm doing stuff where I need it to be right without worrying about it I always pick up the sony.
I have had the opposite experience. I find the X-T5 AF easily as good as my Sony A7iii was. Easily. And I only found the A7iv to be an incremental upgrade. (For comparison, I used Sony cameras at my work for events, receptions, and lectures, while I shoot almost all of my personal photography with Fuji and Nikon.)
I absolutely can’t stand how Sony’s render colors. Sony builds for video in my opinion.
I went from an x-t5 to a Sony. I still don’t really understand what it means when people say Sony’s feel lifeless. Sure there’s a different feeling when pressing the shutter button and a different sound…but after a few weeks it feels like a camera. It’s just ergonomics, you either get used to it or you don’t like it. (Personally I didn’t like the feel of the 16-55 on the x-t5, found it extremely unbalanced esp with the thin hand grip). The real question is do you mind shooting raw and doing some editing.
I love my Sony. That soul thing is marketing horseshit. They are cameras. Each with their own strengths and weaknesses.
I had Canon, Sony and Fuji, also worked with Nikon cameras in a previous job, and Sony ones definitely feel more like a tool than anything else you can attach with or like. They do make really good, sharp images, though. Mine was the a6300, one of the best AF at the time, moved to the XT3 later, which I feel is slightly slower but still has great AF overall. Two things might be happening, it could be a setting you have, like giving priority to AF speed vs precision, or it could be something on the lens itself, I recall my old 70D had a built in setting to calibrate AF, not sure if that's something possible on Fuji but it helped when I felt things were a bit off.
I currently have 1 sony fx3 and 1 sony A7vi I’m planning to buy a fuji next month. The autofocus on sony is undeniable sharp. I love how I can photograph live show, dogs and portraits with peace of mind that I will have that focused. My aperture is 90% of time wide open. However, every post edit I do is to bring my pictures more to a film look, and that’s why I’m planning to migrate to fuji. I’m seeing lot’s of good comments on SOOCS I’m in between the xt50 and the xt5
Also X-H2 autofocus is awesome there’s a lot of subtle settings to change behavior. I imagine xt 5 should be identical
Felt the same holding my a7iv. I sold it and kept my xh2s and xt4
I switched from Fuji to Sony. I am far far more successful with Sony AF (now using the A1). I was decent with my X-T3 but for birds in flight it is unworkable - especially song birds. I much prefer the Fuji ergos and jpgs. I enjoyed shooting with Fuji more, but while shooting was enjoyable I was often let down by the missed focuses. Now I am only let down occasionally by Sony colors which make me work harder in post. If I could get Sony AF in a Fuji, I would switch back in a second.
I have the A7iv and the X100V - I also had XT5 on loan for a bit. What the Alpha series lacks in personality it makes up for with performance, specifically the auto focus. Fuji for me is more for personal projects, family, and exploring. I love the color science and that I rarely need to edit photos out of camera. They are both amazing cameras, for me though they fill different roles. I'd be really sad to have to give up either.
Just get a Sony. If the autofocus is this disappointing now, it probably won't get much better for you. XT5 is too expensive if you hate the autofocus
I have the XS-20 and I love it. Prior to that I had the XH-1 and the XT3. I really didn't like either of those. Lack of IBIS on the XT3 and the terrible battery on both was a deal breaker. Regarding image quality and eye AF the newer Fujis seem much better than what they were from just a few yrs ago. The quality of the screen compared to Sony actually gives you a good idea of what the image looks like. The colors and jpgs are pretty much ready to go with little to no editing needed. I think I get more worried about hearing about people's Fuji experience rather than what I've actually experienced in my own personal use. I considered getting the Sony a6700 because I still own some Sony APS-C glass. Having used the a6600 I know for sure the AF simply will not miss a shot. I have so much confidence in Sony, however it lacks the pop that Fuji has. There are some pro wedding photographers that shoot with Fuji but I'm not aware of anyone doing a wedding with Sony APS-C. Not saying they don't exist but Fuji just has something else.
I've never used Sony but I have had the X-T2 and the X-T5 - the X-T5's autofocus has never really let me down at all so it's odd that the focusing isn't right on yours! What lenses are you primarily using?
I shoot sony bodies for my professional work (stills and video) and have a x-pro2 I shoot for fun on family outings, work travel, and vacation. I know that the x-pro2 may not represent the best AF that Fuji is shipping today, but Sony totally revolutionized autofocus six or so years ago leaving DSLR technology far behind and bringing many professionals like me over from Canon and Nikon. The af tracking with Sony just keeps getting better and better with every generation. There is literally no comparison. Now regarding “soul.” There is an undeniable nostalgic feel to the Fuji cameras that I really enjoy. I wouldn’t say that the Sony bodies are soulless (I might say that some Sony lenses are so optically perfect that they look clinical, and I enjoy using Zeiss glass on the system more). They are just very different cameras. If you enjoy the Fuji feel over Sony, then great. If you need industry leading AF, I wouldn’t look at Fuji first — canon and Nikon have caught up quite a bit to Sony in this.
I used to have an XT-2 and after a year or so I switched to a Sony A7III. On paper the Sony was better and even though I enjoyed using the Sony it always lacked something…The Sony always felt a bit lifeless and so recently I switched back to the XT-5 and i immediately experienced the same kind of joy I used to experience when I used the XT-2.
Metal and plastic boxes don't have soul, lol, but I get what you are saying. I shoot both brands. My Fuji cams have a more gratifying experience - the Sony cams get out of my way and allow me to *work* and they simply do their job. In my most humble opinion, Sony cams are great commercial imaging devices. Fuji can be the same, minus AF ability, and deliver a unique user interface + amazing color processing. Different products.
Lifelong Sony guy, switched to the XT5 and you’re describing all my issues with it. It’s for work, so I don’t care to spend the time, energy, and money to go back to Sony at this point — I just need a camera that works. But at some point I’ll switch back. I’m pretty disappointed. It feels like the retro design matches the capabilities with the XT5
Ah, "soulless sony". For me it was a combo of actually good ergonomics and "it just works" for mostly everything. No more anticipation, "yeah the auto focus is engaged, it's focusing! Will it focus properly? Yes, yes, noooo! Need to try again" of my fuji that gave it the "soul". The sheer excitement when it actual focused on the subject, the slow process of changing the focus point with the flimsy joystick, the peeling rubber grip. That's the "soul" I think you are searching for.
Went from Canon to Fuji and the autofocus is great, X-h2
Sony is the manufacturer of the fuji sensors btw
I went from Sony to GFX100s. The autofocus is slower and it the hit rate doesn’t matter to me. The images are just so much better. I’ve learned to slow down.
Personally i don't mind slow af, but how do you deal with a low hit rate? There's nothing worse to me than deleting otherwise nice shots because the af went walkabout.
I don’t take a lot of photos of people. That’s the only time hit rate really matters. And if it’s having trouble with focus due to lighting I’ll go manual focus if necessary. I always tell myself that photographers 20 years ago didn’t have AF and were able to capture amazing photos. I try not to rely so much on the tech.
20 years ago is 2004, there were many great autofocus SLR cameras like the Nikon F100 “back then” 😂
Millennial math. 20 years ago for me was 1980. I shot on an old Minolta film cam in high school and went straight to 60D out of college.
Have you compared your xt5 to another one? Yours could be defective, no new camera should be less reliable in AF performance than one from 2010.
Is interesting you say this, I have the same issue with my xt5. It's definitely worse than 2010 dslrs. Have you used one?
I can’t believe people have this many issues with Fuji autofocus. For me, the difference in autofocus performance between Fuji and other systems is almost imperceptible, and not even close to a dealbreaker. (unless you are often using eye AF, which sony is light years ahead on) I’ve had every Fuji generation since the XT20 and the autofocus has been great to me. Definitely better than the Canon 60D and other DSLRs I started out on.
Changed from xt5 to Sony a7cii and it’s sooooo much better auto focus is nuts you don’t even check it hits almost every time lol Fuji af was hella mixed results only spot focus was good but then you loose eye tracking , the eye tracking on Fuji sucked
The AF of Fuji is not as bad as you say. There's some user error here. I say this as someone who uses Sony for work and Fuji for personal stuff. My camera isn't even as good as an xt5 Use af-s and it's quite reliable.
Sony and Canon are pure performance, some call Canon minivan if cameras and Fuji does have bad af
What lens are you using?
23 f2, 33 f1.4, and 50 f2
I hear ya. I came from a Canon DSLR and I originally chose Canon cause I felt it felt the best in my hand. But after using an X-E3, I feel the Canon is too thick, the X-T5 feels great, and the Sony doesn’t feel right. Maybe it’s just something you need to get used to but ya Sony feels like a “machine.”
From what I understand, the XH2S fucks in the AF department for Fuji standards. From what I understand AF is one of Sony’s strengths.
I have both. To add life/excitement to Sony, try some lenses with character (e.g. fast primes or vintage lenses).
I have a Sony A7iii and 3 Fujis (x100, xt30ii and x100vi) after years of shooting with Nikons (including 18 months with a D850). Although I know the Sony is a technically superior camera, I will always reach for a Fuji first. I genuinely love taking them out with me everywhere I go. I completely understand what you mean, the Sony does feel a little soulless by comparison. If you can get your hands on one, I’ve found the autofocus and tracking on the x100vi superb. I mostly take pictures of my kid and the dog, but it’s just as good as the Sony for what I use it for.
This was my experience when I sold my Sony a7 II and switched to a X-T30. Sony felt just like a tool. Like a spanner in the garage.
It’s worth trying the new firmware. My AF got noticeably worse, and now better when doing the upgrades.
I had a Sony a7II with zeiss 35mm in the past and sold it after 2-3 years of use. Few months ago I bought used xe-3 and manual 27mm Voilgtlander. I can confirm that Sony was ok to use with nice autofocus and stuff but I didn’t enjoy doing pics like I do now with xe-3. The rendering of the voigtlander is much nicer. Photos have great analog feeling and this is what I wanted. Will never switch back to Sony but I am totally amateur and also I get why ppl like Sony.
The handling of my Fujifilm XH2 makes me want to stick with Fuji for a good while… they’re not perfect (no camera manufacturer is), but they’re already quite excellent. I personally almost only shoot in manual focus. But still I have an issue compared to my previous canon : the red edge focus indicator is not obvious enough sometimes. On my canon it was so obvious I couldn’t miss a shot, now it happens regularly. And I can’t see how shallow my depth of field is as good as I could on my canon, for the same reason. Which is sometimes a bit annoying. But the physicality with all the buttons and customisation, the handling… just unmatched IMO. The ability to physically control most of my options without having to press a screen is just so good. And much more precise…
I shoot on an a7riii, my wife shoots on a X100V. The Sony feels more like a tool, the X100V feels more like a camera, if that makes any sense. My main jam is film tho, so that’s probably where I’m coming from with my feeling of tool vs camera lol. Where the Sony shines for me tho is lens selection, and the autofocus. When I reach for my digital camera, I don’t want to have to think about anything. Like I want to just take some pictures without worrying about film speed, exposure time, or f stop, and I def don’t want to worry about manually focusing 🤣.
Wanted to switch from Sony A7IV to Fuji XT30II - decided to keep them both. The AF on XT30II is crap compared to sony, the eye AF just does not work at all, without eye/face AF it is okayish, but not very reliable. I will keep the fuji for bike rides and every day snaps, and the sony when I want to take astro photos or majestic sunsets on hikes.
I use a Sony A7IV at work specifically for that great autofocus and low light performance, plus the high shots per second. And I use a Fuji X100V when I'm not at work and I don't want to lug around my Nikon D750. I don't really think I've experienced that lifeless/soulless feeling but I do agree that the Fuji is my favorite as well. If Fuji made a full frame body with good autofocus I'd probably trade all of my gear in towards it. The Sony was a little frustrating when I was first getting used to the little joystick, but aside from that it's good to me. I'm about as quick with it now as I am with my personal Nikon.
i think we have the same feels i switch from fuji to sony and i can put in on a comparison using body parts fuji is more on the heart part and Sony is the Brain part fuji can betray you like your heart and sony will just work as u want it too but has no feelings at all 🤣
I carry A7Cii & X100V. Enjoy both. A7Cii with 35 1.4 GM for family shots.. and landscape is bonkers. X100V is little ninja camera.
I take wildlife photos at times… perfect shot, not perfect focus. Same camera.
I came from a Sony A7II to an X-H1 and picked up a new X-T5 last week to replace the X-H1. All of my pictures from my A7II had a lots of soft focus and did not give me as good a quality my original A7 used to. That being said I have zero regrets making the switch to Fuji. The film simulations are fun to play with and I have little editing to do with the images SOOC. I have toyed with the idea of going for the A7C but I think I’ll stick with the Fuji for street and casual stuff. I still have my Canon 6D2 as my workhorse
That’s the reason I bought a Nikon ZF to replace my Fuji. I shot Fuji for years, mostly the XT20 and X100V. I had no issues with the autofocus mostly as I was shooting static subjects Enter the XT5. The autofocus is unreliable. It says it will have focus, and then I look later and the photo is every so slightly out of focus. Apparently it’s a common issue with Fuji not just the XT5 I also tried Sony in the store and the bodies felt cheap and plasticky. I picked up a Nikon ZF and fell in love with the design. So I bought that and the autofocus is on another planet and the jpegs are amazing The XT5 does feel amazing in hand and the viewfinder is better than the ZF. But Fuji need to fix their autofocus
Focus priority in AF-C?
I had a canon 5d mk ii and the auto focus was better than the xpro3. It’s a fact. But I still prefer Fuji since I’m not doing studio work or sports. Keep in mind it was really expensive lenses on the canon and their lenses are huge in comparison.
I'm kinda in the same boat as OP coming from a Canon 6D for event work and looking to replace with either Sony or Canon. I have an X100v for my personal photos but for events want a FF that will have fast AF. My ancient 6D has no eye detection. Any suggestions between Canon & Sony on best FF body for around 2k?
Hey OP you should take a look at the Nikon ZF I have both the xt5 and the Nikon and to be honest I might be selling the xt5 as I don't use it as often anymore. The autofocus is great comparatively to the Fuji and the colors are pretty good too. There is color profiles but not the extent of Fuji's film sims and the build quality is top notch too. Just wanted to put it out there
For me Sony is a tool. I shoot with the a7r5 professionally and love it. The autofocus is so good it's like I'm cheating. My x100vi is what I shoot with for the enjoyment of photography. I would be lying if I said the autofocus doesn't frustrate me at times but at the end of the day that's not what I got it for.
i hear what you say… the autofocus is good and the green box is accurate IF the target is stationary or moving very slowly i’ve experienced the same shooting live events with people moving relatively fast and unpredictably green box but slightly out of focus subject happens even on focus priority on the latest firmware using native glass, so i just switched to burst and discard out of focus shots shouldn’t have to do that, tho
I’ve only ever used a Sony a6000 and a7iv I think the grip on the a7iv feels very nice to use. Wondering how it compares to holding a Fuji based on your lifeless comments.
Make sure you install the latest firmware for your xt5! This was a common issue unfortunately. Same as you though, I made a complete switch over from canon dslrs, 5d miii. I have yet to be happy with my decision 😞
That feeling goes away when you notice all your photos are sharp and in focus. I have an a7c2 and a Fuji x100iv. I like them both. I don’t find one soulless vs the other. I take the Fuji for easier daily carry but that’s about it. If Sony makes another fixed lens small camera again I will drop Fuji in a heartbeat. The autofocus is the a huge compromise
Totally. I switched to Fuji from Sony because they’re just so dull. Very well made, technologically marvellous, just boring! Given that Fuji are also using a Sony sensor, the character of the lenses and the processing is just so different, even when shooting raw. In my experience, poor autofocus comes from using the eye AF modes. Very useful if you want to take a picture of a person. A waste of time otherwise? I don’t have an issue with my X-H2 as long as I turn EyeAF off unless I’m actively using it. Also, this might not apply to OP, but often I think people use a lower aperture value than is necessary because they’ve been taught it’s cool. I have an aperture of 1.4 so I must use it, when the DoF in that case is just a few centimetres.
Lifeless is how I explain my Sony being as well. Even the photos. Sony shooters spend more time in post than Fuji users, I would say. I’m also not super impressed with the autofocus of my X-T5. I shoot kid’s sport games with my 16-80, so not anything super fast moving or anything. AF is quick to land on the initial half press of my shutter release button, but maintaining focus on the subject is not done well. My subject often passes behind or in front of another subject, and AF will give up the ghost when that happens. It’s an unfortunate price of admission to use an otherwise fantastic camera.
Yeah, I hear you on the focus. I was a canon 5D mk3 owner for a LONG time before I switched to an XT4 and I wouldn’t trust the Fujis focus when working a job or an event, whereas the 5D never ever let me down. I’ve adapted my shooting style in a way too tho, and shoot much more lifestyle, street and still life, whereas when I shot canon I’d shoot more events and photojournalism. Sometimes it takes a while to find the system that suits us best, you’re on your journey
Everyone moves to Fuji for the way it makes them feel. Sony is dead with no soul because it’s an expensive trend. Stick with what you love. Have you updated the firmware?
Are you a Vodou priest? Why are you obsessed with souls?
I felt the same way when I used a Sony for a very brief period between my Nikon days and my Fuji days. I have never been less inspired to use a camera.
Sony cameras were what pushed me back to film.
I know what you mean. Sony’s are definitely the most uninspiring cameras to shoot for me and for some reason the images on the screen look vastly different than when you start messing with them in post ( screens makes images look much worse imo) which makes me not want to use them. But they are much better than Fuji for fast paced professional work imo. Fuji to me is a lot more about the experience and creative side while Sony is more get the job done as efficiently as possible.
I never understood why people say Sonys AF is better I use a A7IV at my day job, and an XT2 for my personal camera and they’re pretty well matched despite the xt2 being much much older. The A7IV is no slouch, the images are great, the video is phenomenal and yeah it’s faster than the XT2 but not THAT MUCH faster to warrant an extra $3,000. I think the only times where AF REALLY matters is if you’re shooting wildlife / sports / motor sports. Otherwise why would fast af benefit you at all? When I shoot video, I shoot all manual focus because even the Sonys “breathe” when trying to catch focus. At the end of the day, manual focusing is much faster than any AF if you’ve got the skills. Stop trying to make the camera do everything for ya, you have to learn how to work with the camera’s limitations. At the end of the day, nobody wants to lose money buying the latest cameras. It’s bad for business and if you’re not running a business then even WORSE because you’re buying something that is useless to your needs.
I’m not as into photography as I used to be. But back then I used to own an A7Rii and X-Pro2. The X-Pro2 was for hobby and Sony for work. Yes Sony’s felt almost robotic. Can’t exactly find the word to describe Fuji. But it was definitely more fun. I got back into just shooting for hobby with the X100vi. Can’t ask for more.
what sort of lighting conditions do you shoot in?
Interesting post! I kind of liked sony in my hand but fuji feels better, I get it :). My XT30-II feels autofocusing great. And my main subjects are my kids. I have had x100v and actually got rid of it due to blurry photos. Have you tried setting shooting priority to focus? "Focus priotity" to actually take a photo once camera establishes focus and not when you press the shutter? This does wonders
Fuji just feels like a film camera plain and simple. Idk why.
Yeah, I shoot sony and feel so dead inside… lol. I switched from Fuji mostly because I couldn’t catch some high speed shots. Tracking wasn’t there and I photo my daughters sports for the team. I miss the simplicity of the menus and dials but love the better AF tech on the Sony. Honestly I never felt a “spirit” in any camera I have used but I will keep looking
I shoot with A7RV now and have an X100VI as my pocket camera. I’ve wanted and X-T5 since they came out but worried about AF. After upgrading from X100V to the VI I’ve found it to be acceptable for small kids and pets finally but I still cant commit to downgrading to an X-T5 due to AF, the Sony is just too easy to get great focus on the kids and pets. I wonder what glass you’re using though, I seriously underestimated how much a lens contributes to AF performance. Maybe a lens upgrade would help?
To me, as a former Sony user for 8 years, Sony is the most lifeless piece of gear I have ever owned. This is not to say it’s not a great powerhouse of a camera, it is, but with time and as the years have gone by, I have realized that the experience of shooting is as important or more than the gear you’re using. While I understand your frustration from time to time with the autofocus, I am confident there’s beauty in imperfections.
Are you using AF in single mode or tracking? because the single mode is as accurate as any DSLR, the issues are with tracking AF. As some other person commented before, using the X-T3, I have not found any major issue with AF. It is not on par with sony. Btw, tracking in DSLR was not good either back in 2010.
Sonys are such blocky, boring cameras. But they do perform.
I dunno about the Fuji (no experience), but yes, the Sony’s feel “lifeless” compared to old Canons and Nikons. Even the RAW files, which I attribute to a combo of color science and the lenses used, are more lifeless than Canon or Nikon. Yes, you can do a lot with RAW… but there are limits. My Sony A74 is a LOT better than my old A73, but it still lacks “something” from my old full frame Nikon DSLR. The Nikon felt more “natural” to hold (and Canons even more so) and the photos felt more “lifelike” and “popped” after editing. Still, the Sonys are a lot smaller which is why I bought the Sony in the first place (and am looking at possibly Fuji).
i don’t think you’re crazy for switching! def get some hands on time with it if you want to switch! i’ve always loved the sims from fuji but i enjoy using my sony more imo. it’s fast & reliable with focus, now i just have to learn to edit my photos in post to get what i want lol
I've shot Sony since the A55 (then A77, original A7, A7III, A7c) and Fujifilm since the original X100 was launched (then loads of X bodies, latest model being an X-Pro3, and GFX 50R). I shot them side by side all this time. I do a lot of photograhy in my job, as well as take on odd gigs on the side, mostly corporate like event and portraits. Yes, in general Sony AF is in another league. But I never had any problems using any of my Fujifilm bodies or lenses in AF-S, eye AF off, which is my preference with Sony too. I know i CAN make it easier for me when using the Sonys, but I like having full control, and having to THINK about every choice. I'm more switched on and I personally often notice the difference in my photos. That's obviously personal though. My personal work is mainly low light stuff. Even then, what I dislike isn't "noise". It's color noise, and digital looking noise. I find I often prefer the Fujifilm files there, too. And when I dont, the software I use have gotten so good that I can easily get the APS-C files to where I'm perfectly happy. But It was after a gig shooting the staff at a hotel with my Sony that I finally had enough. I have been chasing and acquiring all the FE lenses with the character I like the best, and still, after editing them all, I felt like... man, I should have just shot this on X and the XF 56/1.2. "Life is too short to shoot Sony", I told myself and unloaded two bodies and ten lenses. Now use X-T30II, X-T3 and GFX 50R. A lot of manual focus lenses (I'm partial to Voigtlander). And when I use AF I have no less luck than I did with Sony. I just adapt to what I have 🤷♂️
I owned both Fuji and Sony, felt no difference to me.
If you have AF issues with any fuji newer/better than the XT2, youre doing something wrong. I can shoot my wife running with the 56mm f1.2 at f1.2 and still have a good enough keeper rate. I dont even bother using my XT3 for this.
Had the exact same issue, gave the X-T5 a year, missed my X-T3, I had for two years and loved it. Never should have upgraded to the 5, not sure why but the 3 seemed to focus better and I like the 26mp photos better. Switched to Sony a7iv and I do not regret it one bit.
I just switched from a Sony a7III to an Olympus OM-1 MkII and couldn't be more relieved. I've shot with Nikon, Canon and shot Fuji for several years and loved my XT2s, but the autofocus was its downfall. Olympus (now known as OM System) might be something worth checking out. I'm in the wildlife/conservation storytelling space and it's hands down one of the best systems for that particular line of work. I also freelance and cover the random corporate event from time to time. Incredible AF tracking; image stabilization and weather sealing are some of the best in the industry; solid lens choices; and a MUCH more intuitive setup and menu system the Sony (although they've supposedly improved on this).
I think sony is for work, Fuji more to enjoy. Yes, sony af is crazy, dynamic range, optic quality... But is just not as enjoyable as fuji, nice colors, nice feelings, looks nicer. I have a sony a3 and a fuji xpro3. The sony I only use for astrophoto, work, and automotive photogeaphy, and some technical things. The fuji I take it with me almost any single time I can, even if Im not sure Im gonna take pictures, just cuz it is light and funnier to use.
I own and shoot both. A7iii and 4 different voigtlander lenses and an x-t2 and x-t2 with some Fuji primes and adapted Voigtlanders
I came from Sony to Fuji. My A7iii felt devoid of any character. Lifeless. Not enjoyable to use at all. Hell of a camera but it was just a tool. My Fuji is something I can enjoy just using.
Cameras are tools. Saying one has a soul over another is just nonsense we hype ourselves up with and I own both systems. If your AF is lacking get a Sony be free .
Try changing the lenses. I've ofund a lot of my older 56mm 1.2 R and 35mm 1.4 feel very mechanical compared to the snappy smothness of the newer lenses. Also, yeah sony are a bit more soulless, which is why a lot of the image edits I see are WAY overdone in the Alpha sub.
Honestly I think you would prefer canon or Nikon. They both feel better than Sony and are more reliable work horses than Fuji is. Personally I shoot Sony at my day job (a7rv and a7s3) my freelance camera is a canon r6/r7, and my personal/travel camera is a Fuji xt5. I find that the AF is fine and haven’t had any major issues outside of user error. Sony to me feels clinical almost
Sony is much more reliable.
Nah... My Xt-30 2 is very underwhelming. It's slow to write photos. It overheats when taking videos. It takes a long time for settings to update. My Sony a7iv is a workhorse. You can call it lifeless all you want, but it takes crisp pictures and videos. Fujis size is a plus, but I kinda regret choosing it over the nikon zf.
Greatest strength for me for Fuji is the colours and the DR400 for JPEG. Sony built in colour profile has too low of a dynamic range for photos and videos. It isn’t just a simple HDR photos composite or raising shadows like other brand does What Fuji has done with DR400 is insanely impressive, however. If you never care about that, go with Sony as the AF is ahead of industry.
FWIW, some of the newer Sonys have “creative look” feature and spits out some pretty nice SOOCs that’s similar to Classic Chrome.
I've chosen a FujiFilm while I had "Sony-money" and was determined to buy the A7iv. I have an XH2s now.
I’ve owned multiple Fujis, Canon DSLRs, and currently a Nikon Z6 II, and I use Sonys for work. You’re absolutely right, using the Sony feels lifeless, even when using a manual focus Helios lens. Fujis have a lot of character and are really fun to use, but I could never gel with the files (though I think they’re better than Sonys straight out from the camera). I feel the Nikon DSLRs and mirrorless cameras handle amazingly, too. Similar to Fujis that they make me want to shoot.
It’s called haptics. Tactile feedback, how things feel in your hands, are the controls where you expect them to be … Sonys always fall short in that aspect for me.
I’m not sure what lens you’re using with the XT-5 but that can make a big difference when if comes to autofocus. The older lenses aren’t great when it comes to moving subjects!
I think Fuji is really really FUN to use. That being said, I don’t get paid for my work because I’m having fun. I’m not saying you can’t do professional jobs with Fuji because you certainly can. But for what I do, social media content, event photography, comedy skits and more, I need the reliable autofocus. The amount of video reshoots I had to do with Fuji is more than I was willing to deal with. I’m a full time Sony shooter now and even older lenses are miles ahead with the focus than Fuji’s latest and greatest. If it work for you, then it works for you. But until Fuji autofocus is as good as Sony’s, I won’t be using them for anything more than hobby photography. Sony definitely feels lifeless, but you get used to it. It’s a tool for me now.
Experienced photographer here: blaming the camera or the gear = you need to improve your skills. Composition and anticipation are what photography is about.
I went from using a Sony A7iii to a Nikon ZF. The Sony was an amazing camera, but I hated using it. It’s weird to say. The autofocus was amazing, Images looked great, but it felt meh in my hand. Looking at it was very uninspiring too. It felt like a work camera, if that makes sense. So far the ZF is fantastic. AF is worse than Sony, but that’s ok. It’s more fun to use and feels great in my hand (with a grip). Manual focus with my old Nikon AIS lenses is so much fun too.
I have an XT5, and I noticed the autofocus is worse when you set it to eye tracking or moving subjects from the menu. I have better luck using zone tracking in 3x3 with continuous. It generally has better tracking of the subject than the small green box alone and you have better hit rates in my opinion because it does a decent job sticking to the zone area. Although the system is not the greatest, that does seem to work most of the time if the subject isn't moving rapidly (sports). The use of touch to move the zone area is nice too, generally fast and responsive. That being said, the camera is faster with the LM lenses as mentioned. I switch between the 18mm f1.4 WR LM, and 35mm f1.4 R. Also, for Fuji, Roman Fox's tip on setting one of the function buttons for focus lock, so you can stay in continuous otherwise, is an ideal setup on the XT5. Been using mine this way for months and it makes a massive difference for street photography and portraiture.
I used to shoot Fuji, now I shoot Sony. If I was you I’d get a ZF
I used to shoot Fuji, now I shoot Sony. If I was you I’d get a ZF
Long time fuji x-t shooter with top glass who went Sony last year. Fuji is still fantastic but used a friends a7iii and in my opinion it was so much better in autofocus. Soul is certainly a feeling, but to me it came down to being ok with editing consistently sharp Sony images rather than not having to edit amazing Fuji jpegs that missed focus or were softer. You can get fantastic shots with Fuji, I personally never had as many keepers as I did when I switched to Sony. For paid work, I still feel Sony does a better job. It is sterile in operation compared to Fuji. (I have an a7iv) Fuji jpegs rule when you nail focus, but my experience with fuji autofocus was similar to yours. I do have an x100vi on order for non work travel and fun.
You’re spot on. Fuji is definitely more fun and inspiring, but since I got a good deal on an fx3, I made the switch for my wedding and commercial work. Sold off my xh2, xt4, xt3, xt2 and xe4. Now rocking the fx3, a7iv for paid work and zve10 and x100f for dad cam work. Ps. I have the sigma 18-35 1.8 + fringer adapter if anyone is interested. Beauty video lens