Is it a good time to buy a XT2?

I've come to the conclusion that I'd like to convert to a mirrorless system for the size and weight savings.
I've decided on the XT2.

With the final firmware update being released it seems like that model may be nearing the end. Should I just jump in now or wait until a newer version?

The rumormill seems to turn about the upgraded video capabilities of a potential new camera and honestly in the 8 years I've had my current camera I've never shot one video so that's kind of irrelevant to me.

My interests are landscape, nature and macro. Is it worth waiting to see what the future holds for the new camera?

Fuji is constantly updating their cameras with firmware updates so new firmware doesn't mean it is nearing its end, it just means fuji is updating again.

The X-H1 just got released and that seems to be Fuji's stab at the Video crowd.

With that said the X-T2 is coming up on its second birthday so there is a possibility that fuji will be releasing an X-T3 with-in a year or so (the X-t1 was out for over 2 and a half years when the X-T2 got released). But the X-H1 might push an X-T3 release back more, only Fuji knows for sure

If you want to hold off for a year or maybe more before getting a new camera then it might be worth the wait. Personal I would get an X-T2 and just have fun shooting instead of sitting around waiting for the "next big thing" because that can become an endless cycle.

In the end the X-T2 is an outstanding camera and will continue to be an outstanding camera even after its successor is released.

I am in the process of ditching my Canon gear after several decades of Canon, and switching to Fujifilm. I have shot with Canon 5D cameras since the original 5D came out, upgrading along the way with each new body release (about a year or two after each release) and building a collection of Canon and Zeiss lenses. It took over a year to finally commit to the idea of switching. I am currently waiting on some Fujinon lenses to come back into stock with my local camera shop and then I will trade everything in and make the switch.

I have been doing a lot of research. The modern Fuji X cameras all share the same sensor more or less - the 24MP x-trans - and the same processor. Each variation is designed to fit different shooting styles and needs, etc. The newest X camera , the X-H1, has IBIS and some other things that appeal to my needs, so I will go with that over the X-T2. The X-T2 just got a firmware upgrade that increases its already terrific capabilities. The idea is to go with what fits you best and, if you want to commit to the Fujifilm system, invest in lenses for the long term. Recently I have seen the X-T2 on sale for a few hundred dollars off of the regular price (for example, $200 off at B&H now for $1399). You can get the camera body, vertical grip and the kit lens for $2229 ($200 off).

Now might be the time to take advantage of deals if the Fujifilm system is what you really want to invest in for the switch to mirrorless. You may also want to take a look at the X-E3 and the X-T20 - if they fit your needs, they cost even less.

Good luck!

kirk

You should tell us more about what gear you currently have and what you are finding limiting about it.

The X-T2 is NOT an ergonomic camera, and does NOT balance larger lenses well. Depending on the focal lengths you find necessary for landscape and nature shooting, that may seriously deter you away from the X-T2.

My gut tells me that the XH1 means that there won't be an XT-3 any time soon. Just a feeling though.

As far as gear goes I have a 60D with 100mm macro, 50mm 1.4, 10-18 and the kit 18-135. So I'm not invested to hard into it and those lens get me by. But weight and bulk make it hard to pack around. Especially when hiking with my kids.

For the fuji I was thinking stick with the kit lens as I've heard its good and pick up probably the 35mm and either the 80mm macro or see if one of the adapters work with my current macro lens for the time being.

I do have to look into what lenses are getting good results for landscape though.

I find the X-T2 very ergonomic, all the buttons and dials are in the right place more or less and easy to push/turn & with long lenses I tend hold/support the lens with my left hand to balance the camera and lightly hold the camera to operate it. If I need to zoom I just find that I'll grip the camera a little tighter for a second or so as I'm zooming. But perhaps that's just me.

No one knows when the replacement for the X-T2 will be announced ( like September for a Feb '19 launch ). Also FW4 might not be the last time we see kaizen for the X-T2. If you don't need the oversized EVF and WR look at the X-T20 or X-E3 as mentioned above. They have the same sensor and processor so have the exact same image quality while being smaller (not always a good thing mind). Happy hunting.

Buy the camera and enjoy it is my advice. There will always be a new body on the horizon, however these pro Fujinon lenses are really something special.

As far as the ergonomics go I added a metal hand grip and I love the X-T2 because I have large hands. With out the hand grip it feels a little on the small side compared to a pro DSLR. From what you shoot primarily I am assuming your camera will be on a tripod a good amount of time anyway.

JaySop wrote in post #18622618
I've come to the conclusion that I'd like to convert to a mirrorless system for the size and weight savings.
I've decided on the XT2.

With the final firmware update being released it seems like that model may be nearing the end. Should I just jump in now or wait until a newer version?

The rumormill seems to turn about the upgraded video capabilities of a potential new camera and honestly in the 8 years I've had my current camera I've never shot one video so that's kind of irrelevant to me.

My interests are landscape, nature and macro. Is it worth waiting to see what the future holds for the new camera?

Analyze Sony landscape images and compare it to Fuji. They have a totally different look. This is where your personal preference will determine what you buy.

If you want brutally honest realistic images of leaves and shrubs, water you'll have a difficult time making Sony A7iii/A7Riii files looking canvas or painterly look or film like. Fuji can often smudge details in landscape images and does not show extreme detail but it can definitely create eye candy. Personal preference will determine what kind of look you want.

Google "Fuji Landscape images" and you'll see a mix of realistic looking images and film like canvas look. Google "Sony Landscape images" and you'll see brutally honest clarity and detail in virtually every image you google.

My point??? Fuji lenses and bodies are truly a great system. Post processing with lightroom can create wormy detail if you go too aggressive on sharpening. However post processing in mixed light and white balance is pretty darn easy peasy to edit. Sony you'll need a different approach in editing and can be more effort in post processing IMO. Clarity and detail can be intense for portraits IMO so you must tone down the image.

Price wise you can get the X-t2 for a steal and get incredible performance.

This image required little post processing. If you were using Sony I don't even think you can achieve this kind of look.

Alan can you post the EXIF for the first image? I am not trying to argue because we know your experience is your experience but maybe the camera settings were the culprit?

I typed in "Fuji X-T2 Landscapes" in Google and got this, https://luminous-landscape.com …impressions-field-review/. the results seem good to me but I am far from a landscape guy.

Osa713 wrote in post #18622970
Alan can you post the EXIF for the first image? I am not trying to argue because we know your experience is your experience but maybe the camera settings were the culprit?

I typed in "Fuji X-T2 Landscapes" in Google and got this, https://luminous-landscape.com …impressions-field-review/. the results seem good to me but I am far from a landscape guy.

I'm far from a landscape shooter

That photo was taken at f/11, 1/250, iso 320. I used my 55-200 long telephoto . Soon as I uplift shadows with many fuji files the image get painterly...but not always. Shooting studio environment or wideopen this painterly look doesn't really show up but the fuji shadow transition is excellent. Sony in my LR 6 with Clarity and Contrast slider set to zero is brutally aggressive looking on human subjects IMO.

Canon also exhibits a painterly look as well so I'm not disrespecting Canon or Fuji. Sony on the other hand IMO is more finicky with auto white balance and the colours SOOC in raw form can still punch you in the face with punchy colours and in your face clarity. Fuji has an "easy on the eyes" approach in their files which you can push to make more punchy if you like. If you adjust kelvin in LR for a fuji file and want to warm up the image you can do that globally without making drastic changes in skin tones. I'm finding Sony you can warm up the kelvin but you'll effect skin tones before pleasantly changing the entire frame.

Some landscape shooters may or may not like how some camera's render. If you look at micro 4/3 landscape images they actually retain a realistic look and not really canvas/painterly look. Fuji and Canon will change small aperture images more like canvas look if you uplift shadows.

Take a gander at the Sony side of POTN. Most contributors have incredible clarity and the sony colours are very punchy. I'm so pleased with Canon and Fuji colour so my eyeballs are still getting acquainted with Sony colour science. I'm actually trying to tone it down with my A7iii.

I think a lot has to do with the quality of light in the two images and not so much the camera brand. Those excellent landscape shots that we see online the photogs wait hours for the right light, it’s usually not a snap shot.....

And I agree the two photos are not a fair comparison, the Sony photo is taken in somewhat diffused light taken under trees while the Fuji shot was taken in what seems like direct sunlight.

If you didn’t use a filter in that situation then no matter the camera brand you will get a washed looking photo because of harsh light that is hitting the sensor.

Osa713 wrote in post #18623175
I think a lot has to do with the quality of light in the two images and not so much the camera brand. Those excellent landscape shots that we see online the photogs wait hours for the right light, it’s usually not a snap shot.....

And I agree the two photos are not a fair comparison, the Sony photo is taken in somewhat diffused light taken under trees while the Fuji shot was taken in what seems like direct sunlight.

If you didn’t use a filter in that situation then no matter the camera brand you will get a washed looking photo because of harsh light that is hitting the sensor.

I'll go one step further; I think it has everything to do with the quality of light (as most things in photography do).

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18623382
I'll go one step further; I think it has everything to do with the quality of light (as most things in photography do).

It's a combination of lens, sensor and light duh LOL!!