A6300 vs X-T2

Which would you prefer? Plusses and minusses? From what I can tell (hard since X-T2 is not out yet)

A6300
+ better AF
+ amazing 4K
+ very small
+ 11fps
+ very "techie" in features
- controls/menus
- not that good 1080p video
- lack of APS-C support in lenses from Sony (FF orientated)
- JPG and noise reduction not that good

X-T2
+ amazing body
+ controls
+ Fuji JPG
+ very good lenses
+ very good EVF
- needs boost/grip for all features
- ISO "cheating"
- hard to process RAWs

Anything missing?

a6300 prone to overheating easily while shooting video, severe rolling shutter, limited lens selection unless you pay premium dollars for heavier lenses.

X-T2 not currently available so everyone relies on the online reviews. I will say I'll be purchasing one after glowing reviews and similar performance like the Xpro2.

Adding the additional grip to the X-T2 is somewhat of a money grab but it'll definitely extend battery life and adds more features and performance to the camera body.

Fuji finally has produced a TTL/hss flash. No real reviews so it'll be interesting how people like/dislike that flash. Flash will not be cheap!!!!

You must analyze your application and see what suits you the best.

Mainly posted this because I'm at a crossroad when it comes to my cameras. Currently own
* D750 + 24-120/F4 + 50/1.8
* A6000 + 24Z + 1670Z + kit + 50/1.8
* RX100IV

The Nikon is used very little, I almost force myself to use it, but it's too heavy for me, I always seem to struggle with the auto fine tune of the AF (compared to the A6000). I love using an EVF and have used Sony mirrorless ever since the NEX5 and kinda love it, but I'm immensely let down by the lack of Sony supporting their APS-C lineup (it's all FF). That said, my lens selection for my Sony is not that bad and I love the pictures it generates. But lately I have been annoyed a bit by some small things in the A6000. Some are fixed in the A6300, some not. Tried an XT1 in the shop and immediately loved the feel of it.

So I'm either upgrading to the A6300 and keep using my Sony lenses. A moderate cost, and somewhat 'needed' since my A6000 seems to be failing a bit lately (shutter stuck in half-press sometimes). Not sure I could replace the D750 with the A6300 completely and the A7RII is out of reach for the moment. And of course this is more a matter of 'wanting' to change instead of 'needing'.

I might order the X-T2 from a shop that allows returns, put it through its paces and if it lives up to the hype, I might (might!) sell my A6000 + lenses + D750 so I could have a budget to invest in some more Fuji glass. I definitely want to return to a 2 camera setup (RX100 + 'main' camera). Other option might be just keeping the A6000 and seeing how long it keeps going, and selling my D750 and add a bit of money to get the A7RII. But that would be quite a bit investment in money.

I do hope to be able to test the XT2 asap.

Sounds like a plan to buy an X-T2 with the flexibility of returning it.

I'm purely guessing but if your a family man wanting to document your kids (look a quick look at your flickr) the X-T2 can be a great alternative.

I'm a Canon guy but the Fuji system can cover a wide variety of applications for my secondary system.

My 16mpx body with current fuji lenses really covers alot of ground without killing the bank. What I did notice on your photostream was that you do not take much action shots. The fuji 16mpx older bodies are substantially cheaper than the new xpro2 and xt-2. Older bodies AF just barely achieves AF for relatively quick action movement. Your seriously spoiled with your nikon and sony a6000 is pretty darn fast compared to older fuji bodies I own.

However jumping into an X-T10 would give you great IQ and buy the 18-55 kit lens. This kit lens is silly good considering it's a f/2.8-4.0.

The A6300 is a killer stills camera. I'd have to spend alot more money for a fast 24mm prime in the sony world. That's my fav focal length. There's not really an affordable f/2.8 zoom in Sony land either. The FF dedicated zooms are very big that defeats the purpose of using a small A6300.

Again some people just adapt and are extremely happy with Sony's lineup.

The X-T2 is going to be on silly awesome camera that will have great IQ at high iso's and fast AF for pretty much any hobbyist sports shooter. 4k video with fuji presets looks very good and reading reviews no mention of overheating like the Sony A6300.

My Canon gear does everything I need it to do when I'm shooting seriously. The fuji with the X-t2 will be pretty darn close to my 5dmk3 with the exception of high iso (assuming my canon ff sensor is better).

I picked up an affordable fuji 55-200 variable aperture zoom and was extremely surprised how sharp it was at all FL. The f/3.5-4.8 is a nice tight aperture sweep for a variable aperture lens. I used this lens to document one of the biggest VW car shows in Canada. I was extremely happy with the results. I was certainly lighter than my 5d3 w/ 70-200 zoom.

Nothing is perfect so just research on gear that will meet your needs. I'm floored in how much fuji has worked its way in my pig headed mentality of "crop sensor". I've never seen such pleasant images on human subjects with a crop sensor. Fuji 16mpx files are organic like my old canon 5d classic full frame.

Have fun testing!!!

That last thing is exactly what I am looking for. The organic look. When I snap pics of my kids with the d750 they always have such a nice, soft (while being sharp) look to them. This is not necessarily due to smaller dof, but I guess ff has something to do with it. My Sony images can look amazingly detailed and sharp but often look kinda 'computerlike'. Like they are missing a bit of soul. So that is what I hope to find in the xt2 which would make me sell the Nikon and Sony altogether. I love my a6000 for what it does and have the great Zeiss 24mm but it never gives me the same kinda look my d750 does. But the Nikon is too big and what bothers me even more, too loud (shutter).

I'm in the process of selling my FF Sony setup to switch fully to Fuji. I've been shooting both for over a year now, even between my X-E2 and my a7S I was more frequently reaching for the X-E2. I've only had my X-Pro2 for less than a week, but I'm certain I'm making the right call.

For me the biggest (and most important) difference is the ergonomics. The Sony cameras produce excellent images, no doubt about it... but I personally just don't get anywhere near as much joy using them. I also generally spend much less time processing the Fuji files because the colors and WB look great straight out of the camera.

I'm sure I'll miss the a7S' crazy high ISO ability sometimes, and the non-teleconverted (crop factor) adapted lenses, but those times will be few and far enough between for me to be very happy with my Fuji setup. Besides, Fuji's lenses are fantastic, and relatively cheap

Fuji for me as well. My current X-T1 will serve as a backup, as I plan to order the T2 after the initial rush to get one subsides. Also, according to Dan Bailey, the boost mode can be accessed w/o having the grip on the camera. I like that!

I currently have the XT2 with me as a rental to compare with the a6300. Posted some experience on dpreview and got a lot of backlash for it. My goal was to compare similar price points and focal lenghts. So I compare the XT2 with the Costs me around 150 euro for 4 days. Quite a bit of money but I really wanted to try the Fuji out before buying. Some observations. Mind these are very subjective, but I can only post what I'm experience so maybe other people can get something out of it. I'm not proclaiming the absolute truth here, nor am I trying to bash either brand/camera.

So this is what I can post after a few hours (more to come...)

+ build quality of the Fuji is very very good, really feels like those older SLR's that seemed to never break

+ I love the dials instead of the PASM modes on other cameras, this is really a major thing

+ JPG rendering and noise reduction is WAY better than what Sony offers. In raw they are pretty close, maybe a little bit of an edge to Fuji

+ white balance on Fuji is definitely more consistent than the Sony

- Sony a6300 is noticeably faster in focussing in AF-S, both with the 16-70 vs 18-55 and the 50/1.8 vs 56/1.2

- the 56/1.2 is very large and heavy but more annoyingly seems pretty sluggish in autofocus and I hear the motor and feel the glass moving. Of course it's 1.2, I know...

- the grip...nah, I have a very hard time comfortably holding the Fuji. The a6300 has a more deep grip and while smaller, it's easier to grip for me. The D750 is no comparison, amazing grip there (bulky camera)

- the XT2 + 56/1.2 is as heavy as the D750 + 50/1.8 and the D750 performs amazingly well there

- I have a hard time getting the XT2 to meter correctly, often the EVF/LCD shows colors and exposure completely different to what I'm getting as a final result. On my a6300 whatever I do on the camera is reflected on the EVF/LCD. I did check the menu setting on the Fuji for 'live view' or whatever it's called, which is on. Strange.

- I'm very spoiled by the AutoDRO of the Sony, which seems to work a lot better than the Fuji

This all may sound negative but I have to admit there's something pretty special about the Fuji, but I'm not sure I could leave my Sony for it. If Sony had the jpg rendering, the white balance and noise reduction the Fuji has, Sony would be on par. And yes, lenses on the Fuji are great but the 56/1.2 is very heavy compared to the 50/1.8 on the Nikon for similar DOF wide open.

Going to test a lot more the next 3 days. Also have the grip but not planning to buy that anyway.