Sony A6000 or Fujifilm X-E2

[jinyoungkim7]

Hey guys,

So I've posted a few times about getting which mirror less camera and I've finally brought the choice down to these 2.

I'm trying to decide between these two mirror less cameras that have recently been announced. I'll be buying the camera mid-april and I was wondering which camera you guys would buy. I'm a beginner photographer that would like to increase my skills and take this camera on travels.

Here are my thoughts:
-The Sony A6000 kit is $500 cheaper than X-E2 kit, however, from what I hear the A6000 kit lens is pretty bad while the X-E2 kit lens are really good. Therefore, if I wanted a regular zoom that is decent I'd have to opt for the 16-70 Zeiss on Sony which would drop me back $1000 and I heard the 16-70 Zeiss is not good enough to warrant that price.

-It seems to me that the lens prices for the two systems are pretty comparable, but from what I understand the Fuji lens are better by a bit. 35mm 1.8 in Sony while 35mm 1.4 in Fuji for example.

-Sony doesn't seem to be very clear on what their road map is with the E mount and have stated that they will be focusing more on the FE mount, their history with mirror less have been iffy, from what others have pointed out.

-I'd really like to consider and buy the A6000 as it is so much cheaper than the X-E2 but after doing some research some say the Fuji ecosystem might be a better investment although the body will be more expensive than Sony's.

What're your guys' thoughts?

Thank you so much!

 

[iTiki]

Hey guys,

So I've posted a few times about getting which mirror less camera and I've finally brought the choice down to these 2.

I'm trying to decide between these two mirror less cameras that have recently been announced. I'll be buying the camera mid-april and I was wondering which camera you guys would buy. I'm a beginner photographer that would like to increase my skills and take this camera on travels.

Here are my thoughts:
-The Sony A6000 kit is $500 cheaper than X-E2 kit, however, from what I hear the A6000 kit lens is pretty bad while the X-E2 kit lens are really good. Therefore, if I wanted a regular zoom that is decent I'd have to opt for the 16-70 Zeiss on Sony which would drop me back $1000 and I heard the 16-70 Zeiss is not good enough to warrant that price.

-It seems to me that the lens prices for the two systems are pretty comparable, but from what I understand the Fuji lens are better by a bit. 35mm 1.8 in Sony while 35mm 1.4 in Fuji for example.

-Sony doesn't seem to be very clear on what their road map is with the E mount and have stated that they will be focusing more on the FE mount, their history with mirror less have been iffy, from what others have pointed out.

-I'd really like to consider and buy the A6000 as it is so much cheaper than the X-E2 but after doing some research some say the Fuji ecosystem might be a better investment although the body will be more expensive than Sony's.

What're your guys' thoughts?

Thank you so much!

My biased opinion is for the Fuji. I switched from a Nikon dslr with glass covering 10mm to 300mm and have no regrets. I'll be adding the new TX-1 soon.

 

[phrehdd]

Hey guys,

So I've posted a few times about getting which mirror less camera and I've finally brought the choice down to these 2.

I'm trying to decide between these two mirror less cameras that have recently been announced. I'll be buying the camera mid-april and I was wondering which camera you guys would buy. I'm a beginner photographer that would like to increase my skills and take this camera on travels.

Here are my thoughts:
-The Sony A6000 kit is $500 cheaper than X-E2 kit, however, from what I hear the A6000 kit lens is pretty bad while the X-E2 kit lens are really good. Therefore, if I wanted a regular zoom that is decent I'd have to opt for the 16-70 Zeiss on Sony which would drop me back $1000 and I heard the 16-70 Zeiss is not good enough to warrant that price.

-It seems to me that the lens prices for the two systems are pretty comparable, but from what I understand the Fuji lens are better by a bit. 35mm 1.8 in Sony while 35mm 1.4 in Fuji for example.

-Sony doesn't seem to be very clear on what their road map is with the E mount and have stated that they will be focusing more on the FE mount, their history with mirror less have been iffy, from what others have pointed out.

-I'd really like to consider and buy the A6000 as it is so much cheaper than the X-E2 but after doing some research some say the Fuji ecosystem might be a better investment although the body will be more expensive than Sony's.

What're your guys' thoughts?

Thank you so much!

I prefer the Fuji line up for many reasons. One thing you should be made aware of is that the Fuji RAW (RAF) files are a bit different than most other RAW files and if you choose the Fuji, you might want to check out some Fuji forums to get some tips on best RAW processing.

Also - have you checked out the Olympus line up? The Olympus top end cameras are really excellent and while expensive, you could possibly get a used camera and enjoy their fine lenses and fast focus capability. In the meanwhile, if you get the X-E2, you will have a really excellent camera and a good starting base to get your skills up as well as fantastic RAW and in camera jpegs.

--------
Fuji X-E1, Fuji X-E2, 35/1,4 , 18-55, 55-200
and other photo gear

 

[MCAsan]

Friday I took all my Canon gear to the consignment table at Showcase Camera. I got Olympus E-M1, 12-40mm f2.8 Pro , and 60mm f2.8 macro. When the 40-150mm f2.8 Pro is released later this year I will get one of those. The wife has the same kit. We will take her Canon stuff to the consignment table after my stuff sells.

Friday evening we went to a photo club spring exhibition opening. There was a competition in four categories. The wife won 2nd place in Landscapes. When we were there we talked to a former club president. He went micro four thirds last year. He said he was too tired dragging a ton of Nikon gear around. We could fully understand.

One of the many nice things about M43 is that the body-lens interface is a published standard. So you can mix brands of bodies and lenses. Also via an adapter (about the side of a TC without glass) you can also use four thirds lenses. So with M43 you are many choices in bodies and lenses.

Wishing all every success with their migration to mirror less.

 

[paolo-]

The Fuji x-e2 is great. My girlfriend recently went from a Canon SLR setup to an x-e2 with a 35mm f/1.4 (more lenses in due time). And really, the thing is a joy to use. Well thought out, quality is great and from what I understand, the lenses are a cut above in term of optical performance (the build is quite nice as well).

On the other hand, the Sony offers great value. Actually, the price is quite amazing, the Fuji seems priced reasonably next to everything on the market, the Sony almost looks underpriced. I'm also not too sure what's up with Sony's strategy in term of lenses. They're starting to have a decent lineup for APS-C but with the release of the full frame E-mount cameras, I wouldn't be surprised if they stop development and expect people to pony up to the FE glass in order to fill up the gaps.

That would really suck considering, size and weight is everything on these cameras. The FE mount lenses, while they seem to deliver great optical performance, aren't very fast and are kind of big next to other mirorless glass. Not to mention they're quite expensive. Canon has the same problem with the EF-S mount. There's no lenses made for the mount, yet most of the cameras they sell are crop sensored. Why are we stuck buying larger more expensive lenses when we only need 75% of it...

That being said, I would probably go with the Sony. I'm a heavy video user and the video on the Fuji kind of sucks really... also, I think the 35mm f/1.8 and 50mmf/1.8 can make a nice kit pretty cheaply especially as both are stabilized.

TL;DR the Fuji is a nice system if you're serious about photography (especially if you come from an old school background). The Sony on the other hand is a nice system for enthusiasts and offers a lot for the money.

 

[Ubele]

-The Sony A6000 kit is $500 cheaper than X-E2 kit, however, from what I hear the A6000 kit lens is pretty bad while the X-E2 kit lens are really good. Therefore, if I wanted a regular zoom that is decent I'd have to opt for the 16-70 Zeiss on Sony which would drop me back $1000 and I heard the 16-70 Zeiss is not good enough to warrant that price.

The fact that you're doing a lot of research is commendable. But as a beginning photographer, you shouldn't get too hung up on a couple of unfavorable reviews based on test charts. I read some of the reviews of the Sony SEL1650PZ, and I also read criticisms of those reviews from real-world users of the lens. (Check out the dpreview forums.) The best advice that proponents of the SEL1650PZ give is to check out photos on Flickr and elsewhere that were shot with that lens, and see if they look good or bad to you. Then do the same for photos shot with the Fuji's kit lens. Can you tell a difference in quality? If so, is the difference worth $500 to you?

After doing exhaustive research last year, I decided on a Sony NEX 6 with the SEL1650PZ kit lens. All things considered, I thought it was the best bang for the buck for what I wanted to do, and budget was a major factor for me. The photos I've taken are so much better in image quality than what I took with my previous camera, a 2005 Canon Powershot A710 point-and-shoot.

As I've said before, from what I read during my own research, pretty much any major camera on the market today, even with their kit lenses, will allow you to take excellent-quality photos. The extremely opinionated people who bash a certain camera or lens give the impression that, if you buy it, pretty much every photo you take is going to be unusably noisy, blurry, distorted, and/or plagued with chromatic aberration. Again, look at photos other people have taken with the equipment you're considering (yes, I know that the A6000 isn't out yet, but the kit lens is), think about what kinds of photos you'll be taking (probably not test charts with the lens wide open at 16 mm and no distortion correction applied), and think about your budget.

 

[FWRLCK]

Also - have you checked out the Olympus line up? The Olympus top end cameras are really excellent and while expensive, you could possibly get a used camera and enjoy their fine lenses and fast focus capability. In the meanwhile, if you get the X-E2, you will have a really excellent camera and a good starting base to get your skills up as well as fantastic RAW and in camera jpegs.

Yeah, he did.

 

[elppa]

FE lenses will work on the Alpha 6000, it's the same mount.

 

[Ish]

I prefer the Fuji myself, I like their cameras and I much prefer the Fuji 18-55 lens to Sony's. I had a NEX 7 for about 10 days before changing it for an X-E1.

Have you thought of getting a not-quite-new Fuji? Since the Fuji X-T1 came out some people have been selling their lightly-used X-E2's to get one.

 

[zakstev]

The A6000 offers faster AF at 11 fps and probably, better tracking capabitity. However, as stated it lags in the lens dept. However there is one lens which has been generally overlooked. That is the lightweight Sony FE 28-70 which is the kit lens for the full frame A7 camera. I have been using it successfully with my APSC Sony model and it should also work well on the A6000. It is a very sharp lens, reported as comparable to the Fuji 18-55. The colors are excellent. Coverage is 100% corner to corner on the APSC. I picked my copy in the used market and these are easy to locate.