X-T4 Announcement

Fuji has posted the XT4 announcement and product page.

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/cameras/x-t4/
https://www.fujifilm.c​om/jp/en/news/hq/3067

DPR First Impressions
https://youtu.be/C2qIy​jEuRhU

- 5 axis, 6.5 stop IBIS
- New 2200mAh battery
- New shutter, 15fps mechanical, 300k actuation rating
- Fully articulating screen
- AF down to -6EV
- Improved video specs
- Classic Negative & Eterna Bleach Bypass film simulations
- Same sensor as X-T3
- $1699 USD / $2200 CAD

Looks very interesting. Except for the price

It did seem a bit boxy in some video reviews


Wonder if canon will offer something comparable in the M line.

I think this will sell a lot of units

I am not a fan... Honestly I feel like Fuji changed everything I love about the X-T2 and X-T3. I am not big video shooter, I like having video features, but I am 95% stills. The X-T3 was the perfect balance in that respect. I am not a fan of the screen, button changes, the bigger size, and battery change.

Get they need to stay competitive with the other companies, but I would have preferred to see this as an X-H2 and not bring these changes to the T line...

This camera is not for me, will keep my X-T2 and X-T3...

Have been looking hard at Fuji, just wishing they offered more long lenses than just 100-400. X-T4 looks like nice but seems geared more toward video users. May p/u a used x-t3 as travel camera

SuperSirLink wrote in post #19016681
I am not a fan... Honestly I feel like Fuji changed everything I love about the X-T2 and X-T3. I am not big video shooter, I like having video features, but I am 95% stills. The X-T3 was the perfect balance in that respect. I am not a fan of the screen, button changes, the bigger size, and battery change.

Get they need to stay competitive with the other companies, but I would have preferred to see this as an X-H2 and not bring these changes to the T line...

This camera is not for me, will keep my X-T2 and X-T3...

I hear you, sticking with my XT-2 & XT-3 as well. The XT-4 is just the XH-2 in disguise. All for video - I'm not interested.

I dig my XT3 but the XT4 addresses all my complaints about the former. I'm not a fan of the tilt screen. A fully articulating screen is great for family snaps on a tripod. Larger battery is welcome as is IBIS. I don't do video yet but it would be helpful with my unstabilized primes.

Considering the XT4 adds three commonly requested features (IBIS, screen, battery life), it's a solid upgrade to the XT3. Instant rebates are available throughout the year, the XT4 should go on sale in a couple of months I imagine.

Can't go wrong either way, XT3 or 4. They both pack a huge feature set into a small package.

I'm surprised they still have a base ISO of 160. Sony's a6300 which was released 3+ years ago had about 1 stop more of dynamic range at base ISO (where landscape photographers make their bread and butter) and to release a camera 3 years later that still doesn't compete with your competition in that regard seems curious. I was looking forward to trying this camera out on some backpacking trips this summer but honestly, with a base iso of 160 I just don't see the point.

I guess from a pure landscaping angle the X-t4 is weak. Well looking at your Flickstream Bcaps I'd think you need/want the best landscaping machine available, which
is my way of saying your stream it top drawer!
But (me a non-landscaper) I'd think most who are landscaping aficionados wouldn't even be looking at APS-C Especially when one can get a used A7Rii for almost 1/2 what
this X unit calls for.

But specs aren't everything eh and for my genre I cringed when I saw the raw buffer. 40 frames? WTH? Well the a9 and D500 have forever spoiled me. Then when I look at the lenses...again
from the bird/BIF/wildlife angle I see there is one. One, and the reviews of the 100400 are mixed at best.

APS-C is great for wildlife though. Looking at the specs I'm surprised in the pixel density (wildlifers like density here for cropability/said for anyone else reading this thread) and I was very surprised to read that the X-T4 is practically the same as my a7Riv, 7.13 to 7.18. That is dense! (D850 is 5.32). Give me density and give me noise. Part of the price we pay for cropability.

Video? There's a couple of bodies at the house fully capable. Have had several more or less so over the years. And I've never shot video on them. My Samsung does fine for that

So why did I pre-order the X-t4? Because I've never owned a Fuji and wanted to get a feel for them.

Thanks for the kind words Yeah, I've only ever shot full frame but this was the summer I was going to try taking a mirriorless APS-C camera backpacking purely for the purpose of saving weight. The older I get the harder it is to schlep a 40 lb pack at elevation so was hoping to be able to find a camera that would save me a couple of pounds.

Bcaps wrote in post #19023081
Thanks for the kind words Yeah, I've only ever shot full frame but this was the summer I was going to try taking a mirriorless APS-C camera backpacking purely for the purpose of saving weight. The older I get the harder it is to schlep a 40 lb pack at elevation so was hoping to be able to find a camera that would save me a couple of pounds.

X-T2 or even an X-T3 is perfect for that! The base ISO is not going to limit you.

OK, I say what I'm going to say knowing that some people get really offensive when you mention a factoid
about a certain camera....the fan boy. Doesn't matter if it is Sony/Canon/Nikon or in this case Fuji. But
the X-trans sensor of the X-T3 has a base ISO of 160.

That can limit you depending on what you are shooting.

This past weekend the she-boss and I walked 5.2 miles (1236 calories too by the way) to see a waterfall. I was not
too exited about the waterfall but needed to get my steps in and the calorie outlay would allow a good meal later.
I did take a camera just in case the falls were better than I thought.
We get there and yep the falls weren't bad......but I wanted some motion blur and didn't think of an ND filter.
On the camera I took the lowest ISO is 50, coupled with the aperture as small as possible I pulled off a shot, if interested-
https://www.flickr.com …9664720971/in/d​ateposted/

Point? Even base ISO can matter. Just depends on who and what.

I don't think the base ISO has changed from the XT3 to the XT4 ?? Probably not since they are the same sensor.
Anyway, just putting the factoids out there.

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #19028749
OK, I say what I'm going to say knowing that some people get really offensive when you mention a factoid
about a certain camera....the fan boy. Doesn't matter if it is Sony/Canon/Nikon or in this case Fuji. But
the X-trans sensor of the X-T3 has a base ISO of 160.

That can limit you depending on what you are shooting.

This past weekend the she-boss and I walked 5.2 miles (1236 calories too by the way) to see a waterfall. I was not
too exited about the waterfall but needed to get my steps in and the calorie outlay would allow a good meal later.
I did take a camera just in case the falls were better than I thought.
We get there and yep the falls weren't bad......but I wanted some motion blur and didn't think of an ND filter.
On the camera I took the lowest ISO is 50, coupled with the aperture as small as possible I pulled off a shot, if interested-
https://www.flickr.com …9664720971/in/d​ateposted/

Point? Even base ISO can matter. Just depends on who and what.

I don't think the base ISO has changed from the XT3 to the XT4 ?? Probably not since they are the same sensor.
Anyway, just putting the factoids out there.

And speaking of factoids...
the lowest ISO on the X-T3 & 4 is 80, in the same way your Sony is 50. ‘Tis good to know your camera alright. Fanboy or not.

Anyway with a static frame like your pleasing waterfall photo it’s really easy to have the movement blurred even at much higher shutter speeds. All you do is snap a load of frames and with a bit of blending magic in photoshop the results are the same. One click in photoshop BTW and in probably less overall time too.

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #19028835
And speaking of factoids...
the lowest ISO on the X-T3 & 4 is 80, in the same way your Sony is 50. ‘Tis good to know your camera alright. Fanboy or not.

Anyway with a static frame like your pleasing waterfall photo it’s really easy to have the movement blurred even at much higher shutter speeds. All you do is snap a load of frames and with a bit of blending magic in photoshop the results are the same. One click in photoshop BTW and in probably less overall time too.

If you're pointing out that I don't know the basics of my own camera your're right! I thought 50 was the native low on the A7Riv. Wrong I am.
Speaking of snapping a lot of frames...one thing I miss in the Riv is the Smooth Reflections app.

The joy of owning a new camera these days, figuring out the tech and settings. They are good times IMO

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #19030603
The joy of owning a new camera these days, figuring out the tech and settings. They are good times IMO

To be completely honest I never use any one camera long enough to ever get to know it before it hits the shelf. I always return (lately I've been shooting
my GM-5 which sat idly for several years).....says a lot of my make up.