Howdy folks, newbie here :)
I have recently been bitten by the photography bug, and so went shopping (as one does).
What I think I’m looking for is a primarily landscape/slow-moving wildlife camera, that will do double duty as my travel/events camera. I set out with an uninformed budget of approximately 1500 CAD (~1050 USD). I have no real intent of going pro, but want a good camera I can grow into. I had it down to 5 options, in decreasing order of price:
- Fuji XT-5
- Fuji XT-50
- Fuji XT-30 ii
- Nikon Z fc
- Olympus OM Mark IV (V?)
(Yes, Fuji’s aesthetic speaks to me lol). After discussing with the local camera shop, they recommended the top two, which were the ones that most had my attention but due to price were only mid-range in my purchase list. They had kind off “poo-poo”-ed the other three as going backwards (xt-30), or great cameras but would hit their limits in personal growth or technical ability (Nikon and Olympus).
After handling the two X-Ts, I found the XT-50 too small, even with a handle attachment, as I have fairly large hands. Which kind of leaves me at the XT-5. So, some questions:
a) Is this way too much to spend on a first serious camera? There seem to be mixed comments about this. This is a pricey camera (2800 CAD incl. 16-50mm kit lens, USD 1965 - double my initial budget). It is by all accounts pretty good, with some autofocus issues, e.g. for bird shots - that Fuji claims to be working on addressing. I’m willing to pull the trigger (click the shutter?) if it’s worth it, I think - I don’t mind spending more once on something that will last me a LONG time. Not really a factor, but this aesthetic has added value of being a show piece - you can have it on the shelf and appreciate that it’s pretty.
b) Is ergonomics worth the extra ~300 bucks over the X-T50? On the surface it seems not, but a few have said it can be the difference between enjoying the hobby and letting it sit on the shelf.
c) Re: the autofocus - have any of you with similar cameras had any issues with this?
d) Are there durability issues with cameras, beyond the obvious? Internal components that can break, and etc?
e) Am I nuts? 😁
I’d be happy to look into some more Canon’s, Nikons, and Sony, this is just the grouping that is holding my attention. I know you can get some fabulous cameras for this type of money.
Thanks in advance!
The other advice looks good, but just a word on Autofocus, especially for wildlife. I’ve not tried any of the eyeball tracking cameras, but if it’s not that, it is just going to be “Closest distinct object”, unless (ironically) it recognises an eyeball or face and clicks to that. “Closest Object” is fine for portraits, etc. but for poorly lit wildlife with undergrowth around it will really struggle: you will forever be focusing on fascinating sticks and leaves. I’m therefore often switching from Autofocus to “Focus on this point” and hoping hand shake won’t put me off target. Occasionally, even resorting to manual focus.
Eyeballs on wildlife in poor light or in cover are, unsurprisingly, hard for cameras to spot.
It will also struggle in poorer light - relatively distant flying birds against a cloudy sky for instance, can leave my Canon R6 searching wildly for a viable focal distance for anything, for all to my eyes it’s “obvious” there’s only one thing worth focusing on. This is the “distinct object” part.
In some ways, the above problems are due to “proper” cameras having a shorter depth of field (but better quality in that field) compared to smart phones, so getting the focus “good enough” is more of a challenge.
That is all to say, Autofocus is nice when it works, but it won’t always work regardless of camera, so still pay attention to the ease of other focusing modes.
I don’t have experience with the Fuji system but I would make sure you’re appropriately budgeting for lenses. The common saying is “date the body, marry the lens,” meaning spend more on getting good lenses than the body. You can hold onto good lenses for a long time and upgrade the body as needed, and good lenses can get super expensive, especially in wildlife.
The kit lens won’t give you enough reach for most wildlife, and it’s probably not the sharpest either.
This is a great thought! From my understanding, the 16-50 is supposed to be a remarkably good kit lens, so in discussion with the local shop, I’d initially planned to run that and maybe pick up a pancake/prime lens (not sure if I’m using that right) too.
But it sounds like maybe the 50 is a little short for wildlife shooting? This might be a lack of familiarity on my part of the “effective range” that lenses have.
I’ll make a point of digging in a bit more detail on telephoto lenses - thanks!
I started my digital photography journey with the Fuji X-T10. The photographs I’ve taken with it are still among some of my favorites. The last Fuji camera I owned was the X-T3. I’ve since moved on to Leica.
IMO, there’s little advantage to the Fuji system these days, aesthetics aside. Full frame mirrorless cameras are practically the same size and price, offer better low light performance, and better image quality.
I would say the first question you should ask yourself is how large you intend to print your images ten years down the road. I’ve had good results printing XT3 images up to 36" but I wouldn’t really go beyond that. The more you learn about photography, the more time you spend in post production zoomed into your images, the more you’ll notice the hardware’s shortcomings (even if others don’t). You never know when you’ll take a shot you fall in love with and want hanging on your wall. You might just want to post on social media now but your prerogatives may change down the road.
Then consider low light photography. The low iso performance of a full frame camera is almost always going to be better than on a cropped sensor.
Next, are you a collector? A lot of people can easily get obsessed with trying different lenses. For me, I started getting into adapting manual focus M Mount lenses to my Fuji which ultimately led me to Leica. Before I knew it, I amassed a collection of a couple dozen lenses just for X mount. Ebay gets something like a 30% cut on electronics now so it’s not as easy to buy and sell things as it used to be.
I would take a look at the lens options for each mount. The cameras themselves may be relatively comparable in price but the lens prices can get out of control. As a nature photographer (which I am not), you may want to look at zoom lenses in the 70-200 range. Compare the costs of these lenses across the board.
The analog esthetic of Fuji is what it took for me to switch from film photography. It’s a great gateway to digital. Eventually, the image quality became more important than “how it looks on a shelf”. Honestly, how it looks on a shelf has never been something I’ve given any thought to. How it feels in the hand and the joy it brings to use it in the field is what got me out of the house to take more pictures. You’ll have to figure out what your priorities are in the coming years and make adjustments.
If you want to stick to a budget, do not count on any camera you buy right now to last you a long time. Even the life of a lens is becoming shorter. As the resolving power of image sensors increase, manufacturers are forced to create better and bigger lenses to keep up. If you were to spend maybe three to five thousand dollars, then maybe possibly you might be able to keep shooting with what you have for a decade or more, if you’re okay missing out on advancing technology.
Lastly, (landscape/slow-moving wildlife) don’t forget to budget for a good tripod. That should last you forever so get the best one with the features you need.
Oh, last lastly, do not be so quick to take the first word of advice you get nor listen to popular “influencers”. The internet has given us all easy opportunity to digest and rehash biased (paid for) information about things we have little to no hands on experience with. Be cautious of any with affiliate links.
Dude, thank you.
Sorry it took me a bit to get back, wanted to give this my full attn. You’ve given me a lot to chew on, but reading this, I think my major takeaways are: a) image quality and getting there reign supreme (go full frame), b) recognize that my needs and priorities will evolve as I get deeper into the hobby (e.g., lens collection, post production, printing), and c) spending the $3-5k on a comparable full frame and some good quality lenses/attachments will be worthwhile, but lifespans on some gear are not as long as they once were. I hope that doesn’t cheapen the value of your comments. Full disclosure, I hadn’t given any real attention to printing (your highest recommendation), I was just excited at the prospect of better photos!
A couple of questions then:
a) I did a some research on full vs. cropped and their +/-, and compared two comparable-ish cameras (XT-5 vs. Sony A7 III/IV full frame), at least in price point. Is the cropped a reasonable intro for now, as I develop my eye for detail/style/preferences? Your comments suggest it’s just not worth it. My thinking is, coming from a phone, everything should look better for a while, and I have a steep learning curve ahead. STEEEP lol. Does this seem like a reasonable interim approach? Or would you still just push for a full frame/end game camera?
b) I love your comment about how it feels in the hand and the joy of use. The comments on the X-T series suggest this is a pretty fun camera to use, which drew me to the X100VI initially (before realizing X-Ts are a better fit). I think on top of ergonomics, fun to use sounds important. Can you share some thoughts on your ergonomics/fun to use experiences with the X-Ts vs., for example, the Leica?
c) More of a comment: I’m mindful of the allure of Leicas. Even before this venture, I had heard of Leica, and decided against early on cuz they absolutely destroy anything like my budget lol. Since your camera history mirrors my potential future, did you find Leica lenses were good with an X-T? Or was it the apparent gap that made you go “screw it, getting a Leica full frame”?
Duly noted about the 70-200mm range, thank you! Also, I looked at lens prices and I see what you mean by out of control - holy crap.
Thanks again for your feedback, and sorry for deluging with more questions - just getting my bearings on what is turning out to be a rabbit-hole :)
I just want to make you aware of what nearly every person starting out with photography eventually comes to learn sooner than later: you and your hobby and your bank account will go through some changes. Don’t expect to put out a couple thousand dollars and be done with it.
Of course, a cropped sensor is more than a reasonable place to start. Some would argue it’s a reasonable place to foster a career in photography.
Ergonomics has more to do with what kind of photography you’re shooting than anything else. Sports and wedding photography will dictate the need for a different set of controls than landscape or studio photography.
I’m a slow picture taker. I started with shooting film in the early '90s on a Canon AE1 Program. The ergonomics of the Fujifilm cameras spoke to me. I have been able to do some photoshoots for events, for bars/restaurants, and did a lot of studio photography with Fuji XT cameras. There have been times I found Fuji limiting in either its control system, it’s autofocus, or (more often) it’s low light performance. Most of the time my experience has helped me to work around any limitations. For example, it’s totally possible (sometimes preferable) to take great high ISO black and white images in low light when color images would look like ass. The high ISO noise in Fujfilm cameras can be great in B&W.
As I started getting into adapting third party lenses to my Fuji system, I became more invested in the characteristics of the lens itself. At the same time, as I was using manual focus lenses more and more, my photo taking got more intentional. It just made sense for me to shift to Leica where I could slow down even more and take advantage of the total characteristic of an expensive lens on a full frame sensor. As the name implies, a cropped sensor is not gathering the characteristics of the perimeter of the lens. I can tell you that my gateway combination was the Fuji XE2 and Voigtlander 40mm f1.4. A fantastic affordable manual focus pocketable-ish setup that I sometimes wish I still had.
I have different cameras for different things. The only digital cameras I have right now are the Leica M-P and Fuji X100V. The rest are 35mm and medium format film cameras. I’m shooting different subject matter today than I was five years ago so the cameras and ergonomics work well for my current needs. If I were to start shooting something else, I’d first consider how fast the subject was moving and what focal length I’d need then build a system around that. Last I looked at cameras, I was considering medium format or the Lumix S5 IIX. If I were considering a career in landscape photography, I would certainly get a medium format camera.
Another word of warning from experience, don’t spread yourself too thin. I had so many cameras and lenses but didn’t have the time to really become proficient with any of them. Again, this pointed me in the direction of Leica. One camera and a few quality lenses will make you a better picture taker than a cabinet full of gear.
