6D Mark II vs Fuji XT20

watson76 wrote in post #18635056
Alan, thanks for the comments, very well thought out. I might have to consider the XT2, as when I tried the 56 1.2 on the XT20 the balancing was cumbersome with the smaller body and large prime. I am not sure why I am having such a tough time between the two systems, maybe I just enjoy certain aspects of both of them with neither one feeling complete, that being said in the end there can only be one.

I kinda learn towards the Canon for the handling, just feels better in hand. I kinda lean toward the Fuji for the images straight out of camera, but again it's a mix. The Canon has a much cleaner, natural look, The Fuji has "brighter colors" and is a bit more vibrant and punchy for tablet / smartphone viewing. Skin tones are a mix. Canon is known for natural skin tones but at times it will render too red or sometimes very pale and yellowish. Fuji can be a more pink, but overall probably more pleasing - I think Fuji's white balance is better.

Just out of curiosity as you seem to have both Canon FF and Fuji, if you had to keep one which one would you choose and why ?

Update, thinking the XT2 might solve some of my handling issues the XT20 is just too small for my hands.

If you purchase a cheap overseas made aluminum grip on an XT10 or XT20 you'll get a more substantial bump grip than the X-t2. I have preference over my Old X-t10 with aluminum grip I bought on Amazon over my not so ergonomic bump of the stock X-t2. Even the Fuji battery booster for the X-t2 isn't much help for confident grip. If you want a bulky Fuji you can always buy the ergonomic X-H1 that has the same sensor as the X-t2 but better video capabilities due to dual processor in the body as well as IBIS. X-H1 has the same small batteries you speak of that gets eaten pretty quick.

Here's an inexpensive body grip for the XT20.
https://www.amazon.ca …et-Fujifilm/dp/B0759MTK61

If you use GT5000 grip tape that aluminum grip will feel almost like a smaller factory Canon 6dmk2 grip!!!!!

Every photographer has different applications. For my indoor family documentation of my kids I'd grab my 5dmk4 with fast prime or Sony A7iii adapted to my Canon glass. They are clearly better in the high iso department over my Fuji X-t2 with 16mm f/1.4.

Put me on a family outing or in a food fair in the mall. The Fuji works great and perfect for that type of photography. Go and analyze many fuji images and you'll see great outdoor images to portraits using great ideal artificial lighting or using good available light. There is still more Canon and Nikon shooters using their gear for demanding wedding photography, wildlife, sports. You will also observe many mirrored shooters are going with the high performance Sony A9, A7Riii and A7iii for a demanding workhorses that have batteries that last forever during a photoshoot.

Fuji colours are fantastic. If you dig Canon colours it will deliver you great photos. Your application is really what is in question since your the person buying your personal gear.

Do some digging and if you use LR be prepared to even experience sharpening "worms" as they still exist in LR classic CC with Fuji files. I do not use phaseOne Capture1 but it's suppose to be "nicer" to fuji files. Since I do not want to learn a new program and LR is still much faster in batch processing I'm not eager for Capture1 software.

Off topic but I'm still in transition to Sony too. The beauty of that system is you can have very small form factor with primes or you can go as big as the Nikon/Canon mirrored bodies with Pro Gmaster zooms. Eye focus and AF with native glass is very impressive. My adapted canon glass in good light focus almost as well as my Canon body.

If you do not mind the 6dmk2 body size I think you can have an incredible setup. NO AF hesitation in low light, red focus assist is absolutely rock solid in pitch black darnkness (Fuji cannot do), superior touch screen, DPAF for amazing video. Incorporate Xrite passport for colour calibration in LR. Excellent battery life and the AF is like a 5dmk3/80D for casual sports/fast action shooting. Only hiccup for me is single memory card slot and 1/4000 max shutter speed.

As a fuji user they'll sway you towards fuji, Ask a Canon user and they may sway you to Canon. A multiple user that will continue to use mutliple systems will have something to say about everything :P

AlanU wrote in post #18635227
Every photographer has different applications. For my indoor family documentation of my kids I'd grab my 5dmk4 with fast prime or Sony A7iii adapted to my Canon glass. They are clearly better in the high iso department over my Fuji X-t2 with 16mm f/1.4.

Put me on a family outing or in a food fair in the mall. The Fuji works great and perfect for that type of photography. Go and analyze many fuji images and you'll see great outdoor images to portraits using great ideal artificial lighting or using good available light. There is still more Canon and Nikon shooters using their gear for demanding wedding photography, wildlife, sports. You will also observe many mirrored shooters are going with the high performance Sony A9, A7Riii and A7iii for a demanding workhorses that have batteries that last forever during a photoshoot.

Fuji colours are fantastic. If you dig Canon colours it will deliver you great photos. Your application is really what is in question since your the person buying your personal gear.

Do some digging and if you use LR be prepared to even experience sharpening "worms" as they still exist in LR classic CC with Fuji files. I do not use phaseOne Capture1 but it's suppose to be "nicer" to fuji files. Since I do not want to learn a new program and LR is still much faster in batch processing I'm not eager for Capture1 software.

Off topic but I'm still in transition to Sony too. The beauty of that system is you can have very small form factor with primes or you can go as big as the Nikon/Canon mirrored bodies with Pro Gmaster zooms. Eye focus and AF with native glass is very impressive. My adapted canon glass in good light focus almost as well as my Canon body.

If you do not mind the 6dmk2 body size I think you can have an incredible setup. NO AF hesitation in low light, red focus assist is absolutely rock solid in pitch black darnkness (Fuji cannot do), superior touch screen, DPAF for amazing video. Incorporate Xrite passport for colour calibration in LR. Excellent battery life and the AF is like a 5dmk3/80D for casual sports/fast action shooting. Only hiccup for me is single memory card slot and 1/4000 max shutter speed.

As a fuji user they'll sway you towards fuji, Ask a Canon user and they may sway you to Canon. A multiple user that will continue to use mutliple systems will have something to say about everything :P

Fuji files are fine at 12800iso - I rarely go near that at home with the kids running about, I posted about that in the Fuji forums with plenty of examples but here's a colour one or Mr. Claus taken in low light @ 12800ISO (1/100 & F/1.4).

Photo from Two Hot Shoes's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (848425)

Alan you used a 16mm prime to photograph moving kids?

Osa713 wrote in post #18635275
Alan you used a 16mm prime to photograph moving kids?

Yes I have a small livingroom

I see, I was thinking about outdoors...

AlanU wrote in post #18635227
Every photographer has different applications. For my indoor family documentation of my kids I'd grab my 5dmk4 with fast prime or Sony A7iii adapted to my Canon glass. They are clearly better in the high iso department over my Fuji X-t2 with 16mm f/1.4.

I thought that high ISO basically doesn't matter, given that you always have a flash with you?

AlanU wrote in post #18321668
Seems majority of the people on this forum seldom use flash. I still cannot believe how this is even possible as this does not maximize the use of the "fuji" tool. Recently I was out to dinner pushing the limits with my 16mm prime. Bumped into a friend in the restaurant and he asked if I could take a group shot photo. I'll have to admit ISO 6400 in low light was absolutely an EPIC fail. I've never been so ill equipped in my life as I usually have a flash in a thinktank pouch when I go out. Honestly my wife's iphone 7 with flash looked better than a $3000+ Fuji combo with no flash!!! Hence the imperative purchase of a fuji flash with bouncing capabilities.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18635498
I thought that high ISO basically doesn't matter, given that you always have a flash with you?

I use flash sometimes if I want the "flash" look or if I have no choice to maximize IQ for low light shooting. The post you dug up was an embarrassing moment as my Fuji combo was a joke with dreadful IQ. I reluctantly gave my friend the photos. I remember that day as it was my 13th year wedding anniversary. The flash from the tiny iphone7+ produced better image quality than my Fuji X-t2 with 16mm f/1.4. I would say the small tiny sensor on the iphone 7+ has a deep DOF and the small tiny flash somehow helped illuminate that group ever so slightly. iirc I didn't own the EF-X500 at that point in time or maybe I left it at home? I'll say the cheap Godox flash i currently own is actually better than the flagship EF-X500 $$$$ I've sold. If I had a Fuji compatible flash that day I would have produced a nice professional group shot but instead I was embarrassed for being so ill equipped.

If i use the adapted Canon 24Lmk2 with the Sony A7iii the AF "works" OK as long as it's a slow moving subject(s) in very low light. I really need to empty my wallet for some Sony native glass to maximize my Sony system.

No need to mention the low light capabilities of the latest Sony full frame in the A7iii. It's certainly better than my Fuji X-t2 for cleaner files for available low light photography.

I now try to lug a flash most of the time in my thinktank pouch.

Osa713 wrote in post #18635278
I see, I was thinking about outdoors...

What's wrong with that?
https://www.fotostart.​dk …=20554-20171207090805.jpg
Sony A6000 with 12mm samyang

soeren wrote in post #18635529
What's wrong with that?
https://www.fotostart.​dk …=20554-20171207090805.jpg
Sony A6000 with 12mm samyang

Amazing shot!

An iPhone 7 took a better low light shot than the 16mm F1.4? Maybe the settings were the culprit?

AlanU wrote in post #18635525
I use flash sometimes if I want the "flash" look or if I have no choice to maximize IQ for low light shooting. The post you dug up was an embarrassing moment as my Fuji combo was a joke with dreadful IQ. I reluctantly gave my friend the photos. I remember that day as it was my 13th year wedding anniversary. The flash from the tiny iphone7+ produced better image quality than my Fuji X-t2 with 16mm f/1.4. I would say the small tiny sensor on the iphone 7+ has a deep DOF and the small tiny flash somehow helped illuminate that group ever so slightly. iirc I didn't own the EF-X500 at that point in time or maybe I left it at home? I'll say the cheap Godox flash i currently own is actually better than the flagship EF-X500 $$$$ I've sold. If I had a Fuji compatible flash that day I would have produced a nice professional group shot but instead I was embarrassed for being so ill equipped.

If i use the adapted Canon 24Lmk2 with the Sony A7iii the AF "works" OK as long as it's a slow moving subject(s) in very low light. I really need to empty my wallet for some Sony native glass to maximize my Sony system.

No need to mention the low light capabilities of the latest Sony full frame in the A7iii. It's certainly better than my Fuji X-t2 for cleaner files for available low light photography.

I now try to lug a flash most of the time in my thinktank pouch.

In the thread in question you insisted rather heavily that one should always use a flash when the light gets low... you can understand my confusion

soeren wrote in post #18635529
What's wrong with that?
https://www.fotostart.​dk …=20554-20171207090805.jpg
Sony A6000 with 12mm samyang

Nice shot, and no AF needed

Osa713 wrote in post #18635540
An iPhone 7 took a better low light shot than the 16mm F1.4? Maybe the settings were the culprit?

Here, have a read; https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1478​981&page=1

Osa713 wrote in post #18635540
An iPhone 7 took a better low light shot than the 16mm F1.4? Maybe the settings were the culprit?

It was just one of those pitch dark restaurants with very minimal lighting. I never even intended on bringing the camera but it was still bright out when we arrived at the restaurant. 13yrs Wedding Anniversary warranted some documentation.

I felt stuck. Small aperture would not have enough dof for the group at the table. Pushing the iso just gave me enough shutter speed to barely hand hold. That Potn post Lucas was referring to was last year about 14mths ago. Knowing I didn't have a flash I should have not taken that photo. My friend urged me to take a photo. I reluctantly took the shot knowing realistically even a full frame would not have really appreciated such dreadful conditions. Bounced flash would have been my best friend.

I could have underexposed even more and pull up the exposure in post. That would have given me more shutter speed. I just wasn't on the ball that day as all I was thinking was "I wish I had a flash" idea in my head.....and "my food is getting cold" LOL!!

Strangest situation I've been in years.

Take the little folding pocket flash with you, I always forget I have that darn thing.

Osa713 wrote in post #18635562
Take the little folding pocket flash with you, I always forget I have that darn thing.

I take mine most places, though I do still wish the X-Pro2 had a flash like the X-E2 did... I can't believe they removed that from the X-E3

Ok so what keeps me coming back to Canon is the handling, the feel, the menu system and the speed (just always feels instantly on).

What keeps me coming back to Fuji is the colors. The images just really stand out. People often tell me how incredible my Fuji images look.

Trying to get the FF look on Fuji crop however is challenging. I have only used the Fuji 35 F2 and the DoF just isn't there for me. I like the 35 however, it's a good general purpose lens. Would the 35 1.4 give me the extra depth I am looking for ?