Sell my DSLR to buy an ILC?

[sm4him]

Is that 60mm macro the longest option the Fuji has? I have no idea, as I've never even investigated these types of cameras, but if there's not anything longer than that 60mm, you'd be seriously limiting your bird shots. Yeah, sometimes they come close. Sometimes, you can set up blinds, etc so even a 50mm will work. But MOSTLY, not.

 

[KmH]

Excessive weight? :lmao:

 

[Solarflare]

The main reasons for a DSLR:
- Top performance AF. Thanks to the mirror box, the autofocus can happen through a separate, specialized sensor, allowing top performance autofocussing.
- No eye problems through an EVF (getting blinded in low light, some people report their eyes hurt etc)
- Very high counts of images because lower current requirements (again because no EVF). A Fuji X can manage about 300 images per battery. My D600 manages 900. The Nikon D4 manages about 4000.

If you want the best image quality.. DLSR! [...]

Oh, definitely not. From the examples I've seen in the net, the image quality of the Fuji X cameras is awesome, both from the sensor and the lenses. While the sensor is only APS-C, I really like what I've seen online about the high ISO - there is more noise than with my D600, but its of pleasing quality. And its only going to get better - the X100s already has AF on chip and higher overall processing speed, and Panasonic and Fuji announced a cooperation over new sensor technology which will probably make the next generation Fuji X cameras only even better.

they are not the fastest lenses especially compared to Pro Canons or Pro Nikons.

Fujifilm does have a 35mm f/1.4 that gets rave reviews. It's $600, but I've already got that lens down in the budget as one of the first 1 or 2 I'd own with the new camera. The other nice prime lens offerings from them include:

• 14mm f/2.8
• 18mm f/2
• 60mm f/2.4 Macro
• 27mm f/2.8 pancake

The 18mm f2 is also a pancake - and reportedly quite disappointing in its performance.

Is that 60mm macro the longest option the Fuji has? I have no idea, as I've never even investigated these types of cameras, but if there's not anything longer than that 60mm, you'd be seriously limiting your bird shots. Yeah, sometimes they come close. Sometimes, you can set up blinds, etc so even a 50mm will work. But MOSTLY, not.

The longest Fuji X lens is currently the xf 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 ois zoom.

They also plan a xf 10-24mm f/4 ois zoom.

 

[Rafterman]

Is that 60mm macro the longest option the Fuji has?

They also have a 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8, but it's $700. I'm not sure what telephotos are available from Zeiss and Leica, but they'll work on the Fuji X cameras. Some with, and some without an adapter.

Excessive weight? :lmao:

If carrying around the D7000 plus 4 lenses and a shoe-mount flash in my bag is excessive to ME, then yes, excessive weight.

The main reasons for a DSLR:
- No eye problems through an EVF (getting blinded in low light, some people report their eyes hurt etc)
- Very high counts of images because lower current requirements (again because no EVF). A Fuji X can manage about 300 images per battery. My D600 manages 900. The Nikon D4 manages about 4000.

The X-Pro 1 has a hybrid VF, with both OVF and EVF options. I personally prefer an OVF to be honest. Battery power isn't a big concern of mine. I'd always have a spare or two handy. Even on a week's vacation to the beach last month, I only took about 300-400 photos, which would be handled easily by an overnight charge or carrying a backup.

 

[Derrel]

The various Fuji X-series cameras are pretty nifty. Sansmirror.com has some review stuff. The Fuji lenses are VERY good, and better than what Sony has to offer, according to Thom.

 

[Rafterman]

Sansmirror.com

Thanks for that link Derrel. Lots of great info on there. I was surprised to see that he didn't like the X-Pro 1 as much as the X-E1, but he makes a good point about the OVF in the Pro sometimes being obscured by longer lenses that would block the user's field of view and may hinder composition. Plus, the size difference between the two, while not huge, is significant and makes the X-E1 the better choice for "pocketability." Of course, the fact that it's $400 cheaper than the Pro is pretty significant as well.

 

[timor]

Here something to support your feelings:
Blog ? Photography By Zack Arias ? ATL ? 404-939-2263 ? studio@zackarias.com
About one pro who dumped dslr.

 

[goodguy]

they are not the fastest lenses especially compared to Pro Canons or Pro Nikons.

Fujifilm does have a 35mm f/1.4 that gets rave reviews. It's $600, but I've already got that lens down in the budget as one of the first 1 or 2 I'd own with the new camera. The other nice prime lens offerings from them include:

• 14mm f/2.8
• 18mm f/2
• 60mm f/2.4 Macro
• 27mm f/2.8 pancake

Thats plenty fast indeed but my comment was for their zoom lenses.

Dont get me wrong, I really respect the X Pro 1, the reviews blew my mind but for now I will stick to DSLR.