Fujifilm X-T10 vs. Sony Alpha 6000 vs. Olympus OMD E-M10 - Which one to buy?

[FXA]

Hi everyone,

I'm planning to buy a new mirrorless system camera. Additionally I'm going to buy the Kit Lens, an affordable Tele Lens and maybe one or two prime lenses later. I also want to adapt some old manual lenses. I could already limit my choice to three main options:

1. Fujifilm X-T10 +16-50 (or 18-55) + 50-230

2. Sony Alpha 6000 +16-50 + 50-210

3. Olympus OMD E-M10 + 14-42 + 40-150

I mainly shoot nature (some wildlife too) and landscape, sometimes cities/architecture and sports and I also take a lot of pictures while traveling, so my gear should not be to big and heavy.

So the Fuji has probably the best image quality and more important also the better Kit Lenses, especially compared to Sony. I like the viewfinder in the Olympus the best and I consider the one in the Sony the worst, I also don't like the position. The Sony has the best grip, but I prefer the menues, the controls and design/build quality in both, the Fuji and the Olympus. I really like filming, so a good video quality would be very nice. I think the Sony is the best here, isn't it. The Fuji lacks ISO 100 and 6400+ in Raw mode which is definitely a downside of this camera. On the other hand the Sony has no built-in Intervalometer which is disappointing because I like shooting star trails and timelapse videos from time to time.

I have got a few questions now:

I have seen that the Fuji raws are looking a bit soft and I read that the NR is active even in Raw mode. Is that true and is it noticeable in normal use?

Does one of these cameras feature Focus Trap?

Does the bigger sensor offer a noticeable advantage with manual lenses as these are originally made for bigger sensors?

Is the Sony 16-50 really that bad?

Which one is better? IBIS in the M10 or the OIS of Sony /Fuji lenses?

And finally...

Which one should I buy?

Thanks a lot for your help

 

[jaomul]

I have an Olympus EM5, which in some ways is similar to the EM10. It's nice, tidy has nice lenses, takes nice pictures, I like it. However it's not much good for tracking moving objects. I don't know much about video, olly does it, but it's not as praised as other makes.

If I was buying a single mirrorless system from scratch now (the olly is my second setup) I'd go for the bigger sensor. If action and video are in your wants which they are, I believe from all I have seen and read that the Sony is a better all-rounder

 

[Ysarex]

Hi everyone,

I'm planning to buy a new mirrorless system camera. Additionally I'm going to buy the Kit Lens, an affordable Tele Lens and maybe one or two prime lenses later. I also want to adapt some old manual lenses. I could already limit my choice to three main options:

1. Fujifilm X-T10 +16-50 (or 18-55) + 50-230

2. Sony Alpha 6000 +16-50 + 50-210

3. Olympus OMD E-M10 + 14-42 + 40-150

I mainly shoot nature (some wildlife too) and landscape, sometimes cities/architecture and sports and I also take a lot of pictures while traveling, so my gear should not be to big and heavy.

So the Fuji has probably the best image quality and more important also the better Kit Lenses, especially compared to Sony. I like the viewfinder in the Olympus the best and I consider the one in the Sony the worst, I also don't like the position. The Sony has the best grip, but I prefer the menues, the controls and design/build quality in both, the Fuji and the Olympus. I really like filming, so a good video quality would be very nice. I think the Sony is the best here, isn't it. The Fuji lacks ISO 100 and 6400+ in Raw mode which is definitely a downside of this camera. On the other hand the Sony has no built-in Intervalometer which is disappointing because I like shooting star trails and timelapse videos from time to time.

I have got a few questions now:

I have seen that the Fuji raws are looking a bit soft and I read that the NR is active even in Raw mode. Is that true and is it noticeable in normal use?

Absolutely not true. The Fuji applies no NR to it's raw files. Fuji does have fairly agressive NR for high ISO JPEGs (above 1600). This does not apply to raw shooters in any way.

Does one of these cameras feature Focus Trap?

Does the bigger sensor offer a noticeable advantage with manual lenses as these are originally made for bigger sensors?

Is the Sony 16-50 really that bad?

Some day in the future it's possible that someone in Sony's marketing department will wake up and realize that lenses are the most important components of a camera system and actually agree to let the engineering department design and build a few good ones -- it could happen.

Which one is better? IBIS in the M10 or the OIS of Sony /Fuji lenses?

And finally...

Which one should I buy?

Rule #1: Lenses take photographs, cameras hold film/sensors. When you're shopping always apply rule #1 first and then move down to the next rule.

Joe

Thanks a lot for your help

 

[chuasam]

if your budget can push it, get the EM5 Mk II because of the better weather resistance.
The cameras stated have difference price points.
The Fujifilm 18-55 is FAR superior to the 16-50
are you talking about the EM10 or EM10 MkII?

 

[FXA]

if your budget can push it, get the EM5 Mk II because of the better weather resistance.
The cameras stated have difference price points.
The Fujifilm 18-55 is FAR superior to the 16-50
are you talking about the EM10 or EM10 MkII?

I'm talking about the EM 10 MkI, because I think the MkII is to expensive, while "only" Is and Viewfinder were improved. I'm planning to buy the camera used and the price raises about hundred euros from E-M10 to Sony and from Fujifilm.

And do you mean the Fujifilm 18-55 is superior to their own 16-50 or to Sony's?

 

[jaomul]

While certainly not the be all end all, this aticle may help your decision

2016 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-800

 

[Gary A.]

I have never used any of the cameras which your are inquiring. But, I have some general remarks. If video is more important than stills, go for the Sony.

The Fuji tends to make higher end niche cameras. Their cameras and lenses are generally priced higher to a similar level camera(s). But, Fuji's build is high quality and their FX lenses are wonderful.

I have FF cameras (1Ds), APS-C cameras (Fuji XT1, XP2) and MFT cameras (EM5 & EM1). I found the Fuji to be a great compromise between the high IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. The Fuji is my camera of choice and the Canons and Oly's are no longer used. The EVF of the XT1 is huge with much better visual quality than my EM1.

Here is a review of the XT10 but at the end compares it to the Sony and Oly.
Fujifilm XT10 review | Cameralabs

 

[FXA]

I have never used any of the cameras which your are inquiring. But, I have some general remarks. If video is more important than stills, go for the Sony.

The Fuji tends to make higher end niche cameras. Their cameras and lenses are generally higher to similar cameras level. But, Fuji's build is high quality and their FX lenses are wonderful.

I have FF cameras (1Ds), APS-C cameras (Fuji XT1, XP2) and MFT cameras (EM5 & EM1). I found the Fuji to be a great compromise between the high IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. The Fuji is my camera of choice and the Canons and Oly's are no longer used. The EVF of the XT1 is huge with much better visual quality than my EM1.

Here is a review of the XT10 but at the end compares it to the Sony and Oly.
Fujifilm XT10 review | Cameralabs

Although I am also making some videos, stills are much more important. How good is the Fuji sensor in terms of RAW-highlight and shadow recovery, especially compared to your other cameras?

 

[Ysarex]

I have never used any of the cameras which your are inquiring. But, I have some general remarks. If video is more important than stills, go for the Sony.

The Fuji tends to make higher end niche cameras. Their cameras and lenses are generally higher to similar cameras level. But, Fuji's build is high quality and their FX lenses are wonderful.

I have FF cameras (1Ds), APS-C cameras (Fuji XT1, XP2) and MFT cameras (EM5 & EM1). I found the Fuji to be a great compromise between the high IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. The Fuji is my camera of choice and the Canons and Oly's are no longer used. The EVF of the XT1 is huge with much better visual quality than my EM1.

Here is a review of the XT10 but at the end compares it to the Sony and Oly.
Fujifilm XT10 review | Cameralabs

Although I am also making some videos, stills are much more important. How good is the Fuji sensor in terms of RAW-highlight and shadow recovery, especially compared to your other cameras?

The Fuji X-Trans DR is excellent -- best in class for the sensor size. Here's Bill Claff's test results for the X-E2 which has the same sensor as the X-T10 (he hasn't done the X-T10 yet): Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

Go to the right side of the graph and add in the other cameras you're considering and the X-Trans should outperform them.

Joe

 

[goooner]

Well it does help that the Fuji 'starts' at 200 doesn't it. It does flatten off at 1600 (800) though, which is quite impressive.

 

[goodguy]

I disagree that IQ on Fuji is better then the Sony sensor, they are about par with the Sony having the advantage of more resolution. 16MP is enough if you don't crop you images but if you do (I always do) then the extra resolution is a nice bonus.
I like the Fuji for the much nicer design and the much better kit lenses.
I like the Sony for having more resolution and I believe better AF system.
Video Sony is better too.

Honestly if I would want a mirrorless and I don't have the option for FF sensor then I would like the Fuji x-Pro II with the 24MP sensor and improve AF system because of the better kit lens compared to the Sony
If I can choose a Sony without the kit lens then I would want a Sony system and get FF lenses so I can use them on A7 camera in the future.
Overall I think Sony offers a better system because the option to use the lenses on both the APS-C and FF cameras, its a nice option like Nikon and Canon (and now Pentax too) are offering.

 

[FXA]

The Fuji X-Trans DR is excellent -- best in class for the sensor size. Here's Bill Claff's test results for the X-E2 which has the same sensor as the X-T10 (he hasn't done the X-T10 yet): Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

Go to the right side of the graph and add in the other cameras you're considering and the X-Trans should outperform them.

Joe

Wow that's pretty impressive. It's even as good as some Full Frame cameras. But I've seen that the X-E2 has a better Dynamic Range than the X-T1, although they use the same sensor. Is this just an inaccurate measurement or is there any other difference?

 

[jaomul]

I suggest if making recommendations to keep in mind the op budget, which is approx price of a Sony A6000

 

[jaomul]

Op, you'll probably find most cameras these days are excellent, look at what grabs you most about a certain model, you'll likely be very happy with that one

 

[Ysarex]

The Fuji X-Trans DR is excellent -- best in class for the sensor size. Here's Bill Claff's test results for the X-E2 which has the same sensor as the X-T10 (he hasn't done the X-T10 yet): Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

Go to the right side of the graph and add in the other cameras you're considering and the X-Trans should outperform them.

Joe

Wow that's pretty impressive. It's even as good as some Full Frame cameras. But I've seen that the X-E2 has a better Dynamic Range than the X-T1, although they use the same sensor. Is this just an inaccurate measurement or is there any other difference?

I noticed that too about the E2 versus T1 and don't know what's going on there. Basically I trust and prefer Bill Claff's data over the other test options out there. X-Trans has a DR advantage over the other cameras in class and as you noted even out-performing some FF sensors because of the CFA. If you look at a sensor CFA of the Bayer variety you note that there are two green filters for every one red and blue pair. Green wasn't chosen randomly to do double duty there. Green is carrying the exposure weight and so 50% of the Bayer CFA filter area is green. The X-Trans sensor ups the green filter percentage by an additional 5.5% over Bayer sensors. I shot Canon FF before I upgraded to Fuji X which has better overall DR.

When I made the decision to switch and started shopping around I applied rule #1 (see above). I started shopping for lenses. I considered Sony and Oly but bottom line I bought the Fuji XF 14mm f/2.8 and everything else fell into place behind that. Fuji takes lens design and manufacture seriously and is building a camera system not just the next flashy set of camera features.

You listed almost everything in your list of what you shoot. You got landscape, cityscape, architecture, nature, wildlife, travel and even sports in there. You may need to prioritize that list some. Do you really shoot wildlife and does that mean for example birds in flight? Do you really shoot fast action sports? Yes? Then all of these cameras you're looking at here are 2nd rate starting with the glass. If you want to shoot BIF get the glass and camera those people are using -- your camera brand is Canon. You really want to shoot landscape, cityscape, travel and nature? Then AF speed is a non-issue. In that list of rules that come after rule #1 you find this rule: The jack of all trades is a master of none. There is no single best of everything camera.

Joe