My experience with quality from the shot before edit is that the Sony was always better. I own the Rx1rii and It became my choice over the Olympus, Fuji and Canon systems. We also have the Nikon Z system and get great results, but for a fixed lens camera, I haven’t seen a better buy - and cropping from 42 rather than 26 is great when i shoot a shot wishing I had a 200 mm lens: but I can often get something useful for a memory at least with the higher MP when shooting from a distance at a subject needing to be cropped later.
So truly said, i want to rant so badly about how sony totally ditch this camera, if they put better processor, screen touch, better auto focus and even bump that price to 4k, it will easily win over something like leica q3.
She’s not wrong, I just don’t go around constantly comparing different cameras, picking them apart and swamping camera platforms back and forth. For me, fuji has this dr400 mode that rolls off the highlights in a very filmic way, the file size are more manageable, even compared to modern fujis, and film sims make for immediate sharing, instead of waiting for processing. Don’t get into analysis paralysis or you will never be able to stop buying new cameras. Make great photos. Just came from a leica film gallery where right next to them were modern digital leica camera gallery. The film was softer, not as sharp, grain everywhere, no detail in shadows… in other words: gorgeous! The digital gallery was sharper, but I saw sharpening artifacts, leica m9 night photos that were obviously stripped of noise, and of course every highlight clipped. The film, despite being technically inferior was the superior photograph. I’ll take my 2018 fuji’s non-bayer noise, manageable 26mp, filmic highlight response, and finished OOC results any day to a technically superior camera! Thanks for posting the video, and for reading!
Just checked prices of both and RX1Rii being more than double the price of x100vi. €1799 vs €4,199.99 (Europe) It doesnt make sense. I would buy the rx1rii if i could afford it too
ive been using the x100t for the last 8 months, i absolutely loved the body style of the camera with its dials and rangefinder design, just looking at the camera would get me inspired to take photos. but there was just something about the images from that camera that would leave me wanting more. about a month ago i came across someone selling the original rx1 for a low enough price that i hopped on it. Long story short i fell inlove with the rx1and just sold both the x100t and rx1 to fund the rx1rII. Something about that full frame sensor + carl zeiss 35 f2 had me hooked.
@@Stan_the_Belgian i think its a combination of the two. the size of the body with that huge sensor and the zeiss 35 glued to the camera are like a match made in heaven. 🤤
I have owned many cameras over the years and currently own too many but the Sony RX1R just blew me away. I have just purchased the RX1R Mark ii and sure this will deliver even more. I have the Leica Q2 but always reach for the Sony when going out to take pictures. Smaller, lighter native 35mm FF and usable 50mm when you either crop or use the Tele/Zoom feature. Sony need to make an updated version of this camera and it ain’t the A7C2. Excellent video and analysis of the two cameras relative merits.
I had (and loved) the Sony RX1R but sold it to get into Fuji GFX medium format, which I don't regret. BUT... there are many days that I miss the gorgeous IQ of the Sony and the small size. Currently, I'm thinking hard about getting either the Leica q2 or the Sony RX1R ii. Sony RX1R is a known factor to me, but the Leica q2 is not... and I'm really caught up in all the hype around it. It would be fun to try something new-- but on the other hand, I don't want to be stuck with an expensive brick if I don't like the q2. How does the q2's image quality compare to the Sony?
@@sierragold Image quality and detail are superb from both cameras with ability to crop. I prefer the final output from the Sony as it has a characteristic colour and contrast from the Zeiss lens. The Q2 is also much heavier and larger but has a better viewfinder resolution. With the Q2 I am always aware I have a very expensive camera to carry and less is with the RX1Rii.
I very much liked the Sony images. They are in focus with great color rendition, resolution, dynamic range and high ISO image quality. The Fujifilm 100V simply can't compete. The Sony rx1rII is the camera I would buy.
THANK YOU!!!! I have BOTH cameras. Been shooting the RX1r2 for many years and finally caved and bought the X100V. Just not as good. I agree with every single thing you said. The masses have fallen for a trend. It’s like wearing yellow crocs.
The 42mpix sensor of the Sony is one of the best sensors Sony ever produced. It's 1,5 stops cleaner as the newer 61mpix sensor and also cleaner as the 50mpix sensor in the A1. I have this sensor in my older A7RIII and I would never give up this camera, as long as Sony is not able to produce something cleaner with this amount of pixels.
Great video! Had every model of X100 since they were released and still have the limited X100 kit for nostalgia. For years now ive been using the original RX1R 24mp with the clip on EVF - although a slightly slower camera still produced superb images that hold up today. Ive had a RX1R II since released and no complaints at all, i love the eye AF that can be assigned to a custom button and the ISO performance in low light is simply amazing. Still unsurpassed today some 8 years on.
I found a clean RX1R II and snapped it up. While I love Fuji colors. With the Fuji hype the price difference swayed me to Sony. Great video and content.
Thank you for this honest comparison. Finally someone who says that the X100V is overrated. The 100V is simply too expensive for what it offers and the X100 VI won't get any cheaper.
I shot the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and X-T1 cameras for years. I sold the X-Pro1 because of the frustrating and inconsistent autofocus and poor EVF. I get the charm and cult following of Fujifilm cameras but I also feel they are overpriced and are not made as well as many other cameras from Nikon, Canon and Sony. In addition, you can purchase a new Nikon ZF full frame camera body for just under $2000.00 at B&H. Just one man's opinion. Thanks so much for the informative and educational content Tilly.
Thanks for all the spectacular photos! Also, speaking to your production value, your talking head video grading is really flattering and not lost on me. I can appreciate the value comparison when looking at how equivalent the price of both are used, but I have some quibbles with your arguments. First, I’d NEVER buy the RX1R ii , used at $2k because I’d be giving up too many modern day advancements. 1. Poor battery-Some get 50-100 shots out of a full charge(unacceptable). 2. Lens distortion-At 35mm Why couldn’t they get rid of this with the fixed lens (come on). 3. No 4K video-Was in other less expensive models, (RX100VA), when released in 2015 (glaring oversight). 4. EVF solution is innovative but seems like it will eventually fail (reliability concerns). 5. Only 2 customizable buttons (really stingy). 6. Auto focus seems slow and unreliable. (Lags behind modern sony cameras). 7. No touch screen LCD. 8. App connectivity- You have to be one of a handful who have the patience or were just lucky to get the app to work. Few brag about the app. 9. Way too Expensive - vs modern alternatives hard to justify. The draw of a full frame, 42MP, shooter in this small form factor is attractive to think about but when considering price, (even used), things get ugly! Why not consider a used, $1100, 24MP, A7C and a used, small, $300, 35mm, Samyang, f1.8 lens as a proxy to your RX1R ii to compare to the Fuji x100v?
I appreciate the thought that went into writing this comment. Thank you for all of the points you made, I don’t disagree that there are more camera options worth exploring. Since I have not shot on the Ricoh yet, I cannot speak on the points you made. However, I recognize that your perspective is shared by others as well. The primary perk of the x100v is the film recipes, which Fuji has in the bag. I am all for used gear that is affordable and functional. My objective is always to get people out of the house and taking photos, with whichever camera inspires them. Whether that is in the world of film or digital photography, that is up to the individual, but fostering creativity is the end goal.
@@tillyshull good deal! I’ve never used a Ricoh camera either, but I can get behind these words! If things do change, and I am able to find a remarkable deal (>$1000), and I can come to grips with everything I’d be giving up, I would be interested in seeing what shooting with 42MP is like 😉. Thanks for responding and keep putting out great videos, Tilly!
There has to be something "wrong" with your X100V output as mine does not have this "blurry" kind of look. Even at f2 it is really sharp but I am not surprised if the RX1Rii outperforms it - bigger lens, ZEISS, FF, more resolutions. Could it be that you had a Film Recipe ongoing? Because the colours are very greenish and there is grain that seems to come from the Grain setting for the JPGs. If these are not RAW VS RAW, the comparison is not fair. Also, you edited the Sony files - the standard setting for RAWs in Lightroom is adjusting the sharpness slider by 40. So, all in all it looks like: X100V JPGs with Grain settings and maybe sharpness / clarity adjustments vs. RX1Rii edited RAWs with extra sharpness because of standard LR behaviour and "edit pop".
in almost every shot the x100v has a film simulation applied which is probably adding noise as well. on top of that the apertures are obviously different. in multiple shots the fuji is clearly either at f2 while the sony is stopped down, or the shutter speed on the fuji is lower than the sony. this is clear because the background blur is noticeably "better" on the fuji in her shots. that wouldn't happen at the same distance and aperture when comparing full frame. sony should have MORE blur. so then if you compare sharpness of a ff vs an apsc where the ff is stopped down and the apsc is wide open, obviously it won't be as sharp. also some shots like the water show clear motion blur from lower SS. so again, not a fair comparison. i'm not even saying she did this on purpose (although some shots were clearly done "side by side" but a fair comparison would be raw files vs raw files unedited or edited the same exact way. with this done i think the sony would have a bit more clarity and resolution. perhaps better really high iso noise performance, but otherwise, the difference would be very small. I think it's possible she got a cruddy lens on the x100v. mine was tack sharp even at f2. like really really good. and i have compared it to sony full frames (a7 series) and it held up pretty well, nothing like this. I suggest she try another x100v or at least admit hers might be janky. lol. best wishes to her, but i would take this as one person's experience. there are other comparisons that show it favors much better. let me reiterate. the sony is probably better in some ways (maybe not all) but the differences should be smaller than these examples. how much that matters to each person will vary.
I had the problem with x-pro1. the colors are amazing in fujilfim but when I zoom on computer screen low light pictures had some kind of watercolor effect. that never happened with my sony a6000.
Does it make sense if the Fujifilm excels at “social media” photography to get it in comparison to just using the latest iPhone? Bit on the fence and convenience of the phone feels like a major factor.
I prefer the Sony but then coming from an A7RM3, i knew i would. I grabbed a s/h RX1-r myself and what a bargain it was ok so its only got 24mp but thats plenty and do i really need 42 mp? Maybe if money isn’t an issue ill eventually go for the ,k 2 but as things stand I’m happy with my little mk1 version that only cost me £755!
It's a good thing there are multiple camera manufacturers with multiple options to cater to those that look for something different and works for them. If we all drove the same car or lived in the same style of house we'd have a lot of unhappy people. Maybe I'm missing something. In the video you refer to the RX1R for a same price purchase, but that is discontinued and 24 Megapixel. Your vid write-up refers to the current MarkII which is 40 Megapixel and the RX1R II is double the cost of the new Fuji VI 40 megapixel? For double the money I'd hope for approx double the benefits. Sounds like it does give those benefits thus they are priced accordingly.
I am looking for compact beginner everyday camera system to learn photography, develop a shooting habit, composition, playing around with manual settings etc. What are some good options? (optional: works well in low light, must: compact) I wanted to learn photography. So I got a used Sony A7s2. Then lens I got with it was damaged. I thought buying a zoom lens would help me practice diversely with different focal lengths. Bought the Tamron 24-70 f2.8. The thing is I don't keep my camera with me. I should have got a fixed focal length lens (which would have also been smaller) and a smaller camera so that I can keep this handy with me always. I need to practice more and more. The setup I have currently I just don't carry with me. I want to click pictures in low light during evening and night after office on weekdays. And on weekends any time.
The Sony is great for scientist imaging, I think. But if you want to make photography, tell a story, share émotions, it's the Fuji. And that's what I live...
Other problems with the Fuji: cropped sensor = the aperture stops are only apparent apertures. I.e. cropped focal length is 35mm. But, optically, 23mm. So, max aperture if at 35mm is not actually f2.8, it is f5 equivalent (1.5 stops less). Dynamic range and high ISO performance of the RX1RII is not only far superior to the Fuji, but actually among the best of any camera on the market for full frame equivalent, even as of 2023. Check out DXOMark. The lens, the Zeiss Sonnar, is also one of the best 35mm lenses in its own right ever made. Coupled with the sensor, which it was designed to pair with, the sharpness, contrast, bokeh and edge to edge performance are all exceptional. There is no contest: the RX1Rii's only natural competitor is the Leica Q2/ Q3 (I say those as it is far superior to the first Q)
Thank you so much for this great video! I've owned the X100V since it's release in 2020 and I have to disagree with you on the build quality. I think it feels very premium and has survived several pretty gnarly drops. As you mentioned though, the autofocus can be very hit or miss and it's absolute dog s**t at night without a denoise plug-in. What makes the Fuji so appealing is the knobs and dials vs the Sony which is much more reliant on custom buttons which I find less intuitive. That being said, I've been really interested in picking up the RX1R II and have to admit - current prices are very tempting!
I own four fujis, two have leica glass on them, the other the new voightlander manual 27mm, so i am used to manually focusing. So on the x100v, I opt to use the “push to af” manual auto focus. In other words, you joystick to your spot and push to focus. When the crowd gets rowdy, i’ll opt for face select😂 Just something i’m used to. When I tried the new 2023 bodies, the AF tracking was on par with modern competition!!! So if a new x100 comes out in the next two years, you can cross off your AF concerns!
Great video Tilly. Picking the ideal camera is always been trial and error I think . I shoot a cropped sensor Fuji X20 compact camera and a cropped sensor Nikon D7000 full sized camera. The Fuji has always impressed me with great images within its' capabilities and the Nikon ...using prime Nikon lenses...always impresses me as well. This being said I really enjoy shooting real film stock through my Nikon F5 35mm camera the most...truly a full frame camera experience! It seems that when I pick up my Nikon cameras I feel more "at home" with them in hand and make great images more often than not. Shooting a fixed lens camera is not for everybody and that would include me. I look forward to your next video...keep shootin'!
Bought an RX1R ii for 1600€ recently. Amazing camera! Except the battery which is horrible. Autofocus is pretty good too! I found sony menu okay but ricoh gr has the best menu's! For the quality we get froom the cambo full frame 35mm zeis Lens it worth every cent's!!!😀
I've used many, many different cameras since I started shooting in 1985. Along the way had m4/3, APS-C, full frame, and medium format. Best image quality is my Fujifilm GFX 50r medium format. The files are simply incredible. But, tied in first place is (well, was) my Sony RX1R. I've had several Fuji APS-C cameras: XT-1, X100S, X-Pro 2, and XT-3. In no way are the files from the Fuji cameras equal to the files of the Sony RX1R with that gorgeous Zeiss Sonnar T lens. The first time I uploaded images from the Sony RX1R to my computer, my jaw dropped on the floor. Just outstanding with tons of micro contrast and that 3-D pop. Those claiming that Fuji APS-C is just as good simply have not seen with their own eyes how an elite lens (Voigtlander/Leica/Zeiss) renders. There is no comparison. The sensor on a camera is important, but far more important is the lens you stick in front of it.. Give me a crap camera with a great lens any day over a great camera and a crap lens. BTW, The comparison shots were great-- also, I thought I recognized Rhett in your images-- I also subscribe to his channel :)
I enjoyed your review and don't dispute that the Sony is a better camera. However, I looked at the prices for the Sony, and I was unable to find them both for about the same price. The Sony seems significantly more expensive.
Actually the x100 line has builtin ND filter and a flash, which is very useable at times. Also, since I don't know and like to much to edit my photos I get the most beautiful photos straight out of my x100v.
I cant agree more. And I am glad that someone said it clearly (they say the AF isnt very good, but they are nit very clear about) You are helpung peaple to pick the rigjt camera.
Good video Tilly. I wanted a X100V for some time however it's lack of availability unless you're willing to pay almost double the price is not acceptable to me. I will take a look at the Sony rx1rii.
You can still buy a X100V if you order one, but you will have to wait up to 3-6 months. I got mine in May after a 6 months wait (I never thought I was going to get the order after 3 months) for the correct retail price of £1,300. I think the X100V is an amazing camera, as long as you get all the settings right, you will always get very sharp images. And I’m someone who picks up on the most minute details of photos etc. I couldn’t disagree with this Tilly more, some of her comparisons between the X100V and Sony RX1RII are not photos I recognise being shot by an X100V. There is also nothing cheap, about the look and feel of the X100V. I think the Sony RX1RII looks cheap, and I personally don’t like Sony cameras (for televisions etc it’s always Sony for me). And I think Tilly just has a natural dislike for the X100V, which is fine. But the camera does live up to it’s hype.
Sony should do Rx1riii with viewfinder like on fuji - with 61MP and 24mm lens with ability to crop to 28mm, 35mm ,50mm that would be awesome street camera
Totally agree. For me, if I buy a digital camera, id go for the digital aspect, to get sharp details and the dynamic range and color depth and full frame. If I want film look, id just get an actual film camera, because film emulation is not satisfying to me, you know in your mind, that you're faking it and it can work in some places, but Id prefer the real thing, it would make me feel really happy As for softer look, its not the same as low quality, because I can get the soft picture with certain lenses and filters and experiments, while the core of the picture would be good quality
I bought my X100V new for $1500 in 2020 and I recall Sony RX1R II was $3700 then so it was not a fair comparison spec-wise. And no way would I pay a camera more than its retail price. Your sample photos from X100V don’t look good, not sure if you set it up that way (underexposed, out of focus, washed out, off colour) or you got defective camera. I don’t own Sony mirrorless but have come close to buying A7 series on many occasions for wanting to move to FF. I have no doubt on the photo quality of Sony from each time I tried the camera but there was always something I don’t like about it. It just feels ‘soul-less’ and doesn’t inspire me. I ended up with Q2. Most recently, I was considering A7C / A7CR II as Sony has now many smaller good quality lenses but again the body feels ‘electronic’. I was ready to accept it but found out they didn’t upgrade their viewfinders, which was a pity and disappointing. Nikon Zf was released in time, and I’m a happy owner now. I’ll still be on the look out if one day Sony releases a camera with more ‘soul’ that inspires me… maybe the RX1R II successor, … maybe one day, I’ll be proud owner of Sony, but not today.
I only shot with the Sony RX1, for one year - 'one camera, one lens'. As a dedicated Fuji user, I find there's no contest when you put this up against an X100 series camera... Using just the RX1 made me a better photographer.
Agree that for $2k, I’d rather buy the rx1r2 though I heard workflow is a bit challenging getting pics from sd card to smugmug or Flickr due to huge size.
Isn't t Sony's AF just as slow since Sony saved the better AF for their A serie series cameras? Or was that only on the MK i gen? I personally went from a Sony SLT A57(aps-c) to a Fuji X-E1(when the X-T10 just came out) years ago, because I didn't bond with the Sony well. On paper it(Sony) was the better camera, but in the real world I enjoyed the Fuji more. Sure, I missed the tilting display, better EVF, better AF & a few Minolta lenses I had, but everything else on the X-E1 just worked better for me. As for IQ it was pretty much the same & really came down to preference.
Great video, thanks for the comparison! I've had an X100V for years and love it. I'd love to get my hands on a Sony for my own comparison as well but every time I see images shared from them they just feel a bit lifeless. This is likely subjective, and I'm not sure if it's the bokeh or the colours or what but.. even in this video I still prefer the Fuji images. Although that doesn't erase the points of it's full frame capabilities and all.
images for the fuji look way more cinematic than the sony that look like more a smartphone photo, its an easy choice for me, fuji win ( and the bokeh from the fuji destroy complitely the sony in my taste)
I’m agreeing here mate. I have the Sony so was interested to see what she said. It’s as if the video is a troll because the 100v photos side by side are wayyyyyy nicer. I don’t know if the Sony was being shot wrong because yeah it looked like iPhone photos in comparison
You can get a new Fujifilm X-T5 with something like a 23mm F/2 for 2150$, Sony a7C with Tamron 24mm F/2.8 Di III OSD for 2000$, if for some reason you really need that full-frame sensor in a compact body, Canon EOS R8 for 1500$, if you're ready to trade a few inches for actually good ergonomics, or the latest Sony a6700 for 1400$ with some great lens options within remaining budget. Why even bother with a fixed lens(!) used digital camera from 2016(!) for 2k(!!!)? It doesn't even look like a vintage accessory, which is important when it comes to Fuji X100V. Your photos are amazing though.
That Sony is not 2k it is almost like 3k and that Fuji is a 1.5k camera, so not a fair comparison. The image in the Fuji while grainy has more character IMO. It looks more film like and less digital. Some people prefer that.
I am an old school photographer (35 years professionally). I've shot practically every brand and type of film to digital camera during that period. I purchased the X100V a couple of years ago from Amazon because I missed the Fuji colors from my S1pro, S2pro and S5pro Fuji DSLR days and thought it would be a great everyday carry body. I'm in agreement with you 100%. Ive gotten some excellent images but the X100V does nothing special apart from nearly any current Fuji camera except maybe the leaf shutter. The film simulations are cool and if you are fine with being methodical, I get it. But again, nothing special. I'm trying to decide between the XT-5, Sony 6700 or Sony A7C to replace it. I'm just tired of fighting the X100. I don;t see it's flaws as character, I just see flaws. At the current price. Don't believe the hype.
Fuji X100V is a nice enthusiastic and travel camera, but it’s definitely not in the same league as a full frame Sony BSI camera with gorgeous Zeiss sonnar f2 lens..!
I'm a Olympus shooter for 18 years, and the x100 is my first camera away from the m4/3 system. Absolute, nothing about the 100v is accurate you are describing about it.
I realised many years ago that the Fuji x100 series is amazing camera only when it's the only camera around. I had taken my new x100S to a wedding back in 2014 i think alongside my D600. The X100s images were just not on par. It's not that they weren't good.... but it just didn't look that great. It just didn't feel great in my hands. Just didn't feel like a proper camera...for holidays ...sure but not for paying jobs. I understand there are some pros who just work with X100 series cameras. I have no idea how they do it, but I am not that brave! I have shot film and digital since 1999 and have used all sorts of cameras but there is no way I would use one of these when customers are paying.
lol that comparison photo of the rocks makes no sense. the fuji is clearly using a wider aperture. and ironically it makes it look like it has better background separation. if they're both shot wide open or both at the same aperture i bet the results would have been noticeably different... also in the side by side my x100v is nowhere near as soft as yours... seems odd maybe you got a junk lens...my x100v has literally taken razor sharp photos...
God bless you for this video! I have had the Fuji X100V for years, and have never been impressed with it. People love them for the film recipes, and mainly for the Portra 400 recipe. I have been shooting film for years, and my Portra images aren't green like the ones that this camera produces. I ended up buying the Leica Q2, which is almost perfect.
Wait; You'r comparing a 42Mpx full frame $ 4000 camera to a 26Mpx APS-C $ 1500... And than you tricked the comparing images.. It's just not true. I use both camera's (plus several Nikon's) and the difference is mainly in the price and bit of dynamic range. of the x100v is not as good as the Sony, no. Comparison Sony to a Leica Q2 would haven been better. But then; I come from the film days and I love the approach of the Fuji with its analog layout. In my opinion it doesn't feel cheap in any way.
The X100V feels cheap? Did Sony tell you say that? IMHO the Fuji camera is super well built and is a delight to handle. Image quality is very good. Each to their own of course. I know several long-term Sony owners who would probably agree with what you have to say about the RX1R. It certainly is a very attractive looking camera. Yes the X100V is pricey but not more so than the Sony.
All Sony cameras are technically very good but they lack soul and for me I would have always picked the Fuji as in my opinion they are enjoyable and more engaging than the Sony. The Sony cameras are like Teslas, technically good but soul less compared to a European equivalent. Also surprising you can’t get good quality out of the Fuji, the bokeh is perfect and the auto focus isn’t as bad as you make out.
I had two X100's (X100 and X100T). while it is a good camera, it is really overhyped. I moved on and got a Leica Q and it was the camera that the X100 couldn't be. Now the current X100 is overpriced, and the Leica Q can be found for the same or even lower price. The Sony has issues too such as battery life, and it is a Sony, meaning that it has complex menu structures and lots of buttons. lots of buttons get in the way.
Do Fuji fanboys not understand that film profiles are a software thing? The better the lens and sensor, the better your RAW files will be and the “soul” and “feel” Is best cooked up in post. People should complain that Sony shoot sterile or clinical images that just don’t have a great feel, don’t understand the importance of post with all digital cameras.
I am not a fanboy of any particular brand. I just happened to settle on the Sony A7RV as my main for getting those "sterile or clinical" perfect shots (wildlife, landscapes) -- after editing, of course. And yes, all files coming out of cameras are a software thing. Even Sony RAW files. With that said, I also have a Fujifilm X100V that goes EVERYWHERE with me as soon as I step out of the house (even on shoots that require my Sony setup). Why? Two reasons: 1) I love the film simulation "software thing" coming out of the camera in where I don't have to even touch an editing software. In fact, I now only shoot JPG with my X100V (yes, it is that good to me) because getting imperfect "straight out of camera" is a feature and can sometimes suprise me, just like when I used to shoot film. The point is to emulate the experiences of shooting film without actually loading in a canister of film. So why not just shoot film? Simple. I'm not rich enough to buy loads of films (for the many shooting mistakes I have and will continue to make) and paying for them to be developed. 2) There is this liberating/fun/satisfaction factor in shooting with a "simple" camera with a fix lens where you don't care so much about perfect photos. In fact, it's those imperfections and recipes that gives cameras like the X100V its character or "soul". It is how you set up YOUR recipe and the way that you shoot that makes these types of cameras (tools) uniquely yours. Your art, your "soul". It is the same reason why some people chose to put on old/relic/cheap lenses onto their latest and greatest cameras. Again, it's the custom film recipes that you can add/create on top of the pre-built ones are what makes Fujifilm cameras truly enjoyable. If you get bored of one recipe or look, you can try another. The OP said something about not liking a green tint to her photos. She could have easily customized the recipe she was using to remove that green tint. I'm afraid the OP just doesn't understand or have taken the time to understand her tools before making videos like this.
All Sony cameras are technically very good but they lack soul and for me I would have always picked the Fuji as in my opinion they are enjoyable and more engaging than the Sony. The Sony cameras are like Teslas, technically good but soul less compared to a European equivalent. Also surprising you can’t get good quality out of the Fuji, the bokeh is perfect and the auto focus isn’t as bad as you make out.
I can’t agree more … I have the Sony RXRii as well and it’s terrible in focusing. Let’s not even talk about video qualities which is very bad for a $3200 camera. I’d rather buy a Leica Q1 which will blow away the Sony. Also remember that this coming month on February 20, Fujifilm will announce the new successor to the Fujifilm X100V. And to top it all, remember that the Fujifilm X100V is Out-of-Stock everywhere. There is a reason for it. The Sony RXRii was a huge flop for Sony.
My experience with quality from the shot before edit is that the Sony was always better. I own the Rx1rii and It became my choice over the Olympus, Fuji and Canon systems. We also have the Nikon Z system and get great results, but for a fixed lens camera, I haven’t seen a better buy - and cropping from 42 rather than 26 is great when i shoot a shot wishing I had a 200 mm lens: but I can often get something useful for a memory at least with the higher MP when shooting from a distance at a subject needing to be cropped later.
So truly said, i want to rant so badly about how sony totally ditch this camera, if they put better processor, screen touch, better auto focus and even bump that price to 4k, it will easily win over something like leica q3.
She’s not wrong, I just don’t go around constantly comparing different cameras, picking them apart and swamping camera platforms back and forth.
For me, fuji has this dr400 mode that rolls off the highlights in a very filmic way, the file size are more manageable, even compared to modern fujis, and film sims make for immediate sharing, instead of waiting for processing.
Don’t get into analysis paralysis or you will never be able to stop buying new cameras.
Make great photos.
Just came from a leica film gallery where right next to them were modern digital leica camera gallery. The film was softer, not as sharp, grain everywhere, no detail in shadows… in other words: gorgeous!
The digital gallery was sharper, but I saw sharpening artifacts, leica m9 night photos that were obviously stripped of noise, and of course every highlight clipped.
The film, despite being technically inferior was the superior photograph.
I’ll take my 2018 fuji’s non-bayer noise, manageable 26mp, filmic highlight response, and finished OOC results any day to a technically superior camera!
Thanks for posting the video, and for reading!
I did end up selling my X100V for the RX1R II. I miss it, but I don't regret it. I also had it before the hype so I paid a little under retail.
Just checked prices of both and RX1Rii being more than double the price of x100vi. €1799 vs €4,199.99 (Europe) It doesnt make sense. I would buy the rx1rii if i could afford it too
@@NuffSaidU damn that's steep, I got mine for about 1,720.72 Euro a few years back off ebay.
ive been using the x100t for the last 8 months, i absolutely loved the body style of the camera with its dials and rangefinder design, just looking at the camera would get me inspired to take photos. but there was just something about the images from that camera that would leave me wanting more. about a month ago i came across someone selling the original rx1 for a low enough price that i hopped on it. Long story short i fell inlove with the rx1and just sold both the x100t and rx1 to fund the rx1rII. Something about that full frame sensor + carl zeiss 35 f2 had me hooked.
Is it the lens though or the camera?
@@Stan_the_Belgian i think its a combination of the two. the size of the body with that huge sensor and the zeiss 35 glued to the camera are like a match made in heaven. 🤤
I tend to agree, zeiss is no joke, though the fuji is no slouch either, you can make beautiful pictures with both.
I have owned many cameras over the years and currently own too many but the Sony RX1R just blew me away. I have just purchased the RX1R Mark ii and sure this will deliver even more. I have the Leica Q2 but always reach for the Sony when going out to take pictures. Smaller, lighter native 35mm FF and usable 50mm when you either crop or use the Tele/Zoom feature. Sony need to make an updated version of this camera and it ain’t the A7C2. Excellent video and analysis of the two cameras relative merits.
I had (and loved) the Sony RX1R but sold it to get into Fuji GFX medium format, which I don't regret. BUT... there are many days that I miss the gorgeous IQ of the Sony and the small size. Currently, I'm thinking hard about getting either the Leica q2 or the Sony RX1R ii. Sony RX1R is a known factor to me, but the Leica q2 is not... and I'm really caught up in all the hype around it. It would be fun to try something new-- but on the other hand, I don't want to be stuck with an expensive brick if I don't like the q2. How does the q2's image quality compare to the Sony?
@@sierragold Image quality and detail are superb from both cameras with ability to crop. I prefer the final output from the Sony as it has a characteristic colour and contrast from the Zeiss lens. The Q2 is also much heavier and larger but has a better viewfinder resolution. With the Q2 I am always aware I have a very expensive camera to carry and less is with the RX1Rii.
@@Brightsparks1960 Thank you for your reply, this helps me make my decision.
I very much liked the Sony images. They are in focus with great color rendition, resolution, dynamic range and high ISO image quality. The Fujifilm 100V simply can't compete. The Sony rx1rII is the camera I would buy.
the setting on that fuji were not right, and that is some user problem here. all the images looked like she had a mist-filter on her lens!
THANK YOU!!!! I have BOTH cameras. Been shooting the RX1r2 for many years and finally caved and bought the X100V. Just not as good. I agree with every single thing you said. The masses have fallen for a trend. It’s like wearing yellow crocs.
The 42mpix sensor of the Sony is one of the best sensors Sony ever produced. It's 1,5 stops cleaner as the newer 61mpix sensor and also cleaner as the 50mpix sensor in the A1. I have this sensor in my older A7RIII and I would never give up this camera, as long as Sony is not able to produce something cleaner with this amount of pixels.
Great video! Had every model of X100 since they were released and still have the limited X100 kit for nostalgia. For years now ive been using the original RX1R 24mp with the clip on EVF - although a slightly slower camera still produced superb images that hold up today. Ive had a RX1R II since released and no complaints at all, i love the eye AF that can be assigned to a custom button and the ISO performance in low light is simply amazing. Still unsurpassed today some 8 years on.
I found a clean RX1R II and snapped it up. While I love Fuji colors. With the Fuji hype the price difference swayed me to Sony. Great video and content.
Thank you for this honest comparison. Finally someone who says that the X100V is overrated. The 100V is simply too expensive for what it offers and the X100 VI won't get any cheaper.
Any reliable rumors about the next Sony RX1R?
I shot the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and X-T1 cameras for years. I sold the X-Pro1 because of the frustrating and inconsistent autofocus and poor EVF. I get the charm and cult following of Fujifilm cameras but I also feel they are overpriced and are not made as well as many other cameras from Nikon, Canon and Sony. In addition, you can purchase a new Nikon ZF full frame camera body for just under $2000.00 at B&H. Just one man's opinion. Thanks so much for the informative and educational content Tilly.
Thanks for all the spectacular photos! Also, speaking to your production value, your talking head video grading is really flattering and not lost on me. I can appreciate the value comparison when looking at how equivalent the price of both are used, but I have some quibbles with your arguments. First, I’d NEVER buy the RX1R ii , used at $2k because I’d be giving up too many modern day advancements.
1. Poor battery-Some get 50-100 shots out of a full charge(unacceptable).
2. Lens distortion-At 35mm Why couldn’t they get rid of this with the fixed lens (come on).
3. No 4K video-Was in other less expensive models, (RX100VA), when released in 2015 (glaring oversight).
4. EVF solution is innovative but seems like it will eventually fail (reliability concerns).
5. Only 2 customizable buttons (really stingy).
6. Auto focus seems slow and unreliable. (Lags behind modern sony cameras).
7. No touch screen LCD.
8. App connectivity- You have to be one of a handful who have the patience or were just lucky to get the app to work. Few brag about the app.
9. Way too Expensive - vs modern alternatives hard to justify.
The draw of a full frame, 42MP, shooter in this small form factor is attractive to think about but when considering price, (even used), things get ugly! Why not consider a used, $1100, 24MP, A7C and a used, small, $300, 35mm, Samyang, f1.8 lens as a proxy to your RX1R ii to compare to the Fuji x100v?
I appreciate the thought that went into writing this comment. Thank you for all of the points you made, I don’t disagree that there are more camera options worth exploring. Since I have not shot on the Ricoh yet, I cannot speak on the points you made. However, I recognize that your perspective is shared by others as well. The primary perk of the x100v is the film recipes, which Fuji has in the bag. I am all for used gear that is affordable and functional. My objective is always to get people out of the house and taking photos, with whichever camera inspires them. Whether that is in the world of film or digital photography, that is up to the individual, but fostering creativity is the end goal.
@@tillyshull good deal! I’ve never used a Ricoh camera either, but I can get behind these words! If things do change, and I am able to find a remarkable deal (>$1000), and I can come to grips with everything I’d be giving up, I would be interested in seeing what shooting with 42MP is like 😉. Thanks for responding and keep putting out great videos, Tilly!
There has to be something "wrong" with your X100V output as mine does not have this "blurry" kind of look. Even at f2 it is really sharp but I am not surprised if the RX1Rii outperforms it - bigger lens, ZEISS, FF, more resolutions. Could it be that you had a Film Recipe ongoing? Because the colours are very greenish and there is grain that seems to come from the Grain setting for the JPGs. If these are not RAW VS RAW, the comparison is not fair. Also, you edited the Sony files - the standard setting for RAWs in Lightroom is adjusting the sharpness slider by 40. So, all in all it looks like: X100V JPGs with Grain settings and maybe sharpness / clarity adjustments vs. RX1Rii edited RAWs with extra sharpness because of standard LR behaviour and "edit pop".
in almost every shot the x100v has a film simulation applied which is probably adding noise as well. on top of that the apertures are obviously different. in multiple shots the fuji is clearly either at f2 while the sony is stopped down, or the shutter speed on the fuji is lower than the sony. this is clear because the background blur is noticeably "better" on the fuji in her shots. that wouldn't happen at the same distance and aperture when comparing full frame. sony should have MORE blur. so then if you compare sharpness of a ff vs an apsc where the ff is stopped down and the apsc is wide open, obviously it won't be as sharp. also some shots like the water show clear motion blur from lower SS. so again, not a fair comparison.
i'm not even saying she did this on purpose (although some shots were clearly done "side by side" but a fair comparison would be raw files vs raw files unedited or edited the same exact way. with this done i think the sony would have a bit more clarity and resolution. perhaps better really high iso noise performance, but otherwise, the difference would be very small. I think it's possible she got a cruddy lens on the x100v. mine was tack sharp even at f2. like really really good. and i have compared it to sony full frames (a7 series) and it held up pretty well, nothing like this. I suggest she try another x100v or at least admit hers might be janky. lol. best wishes to her, but i would take this as one person's experience. there are other comparisons that show it favors much better.
let me reiterate. the sony is probably better in some ways (maybe not all) but the differences should be smaller than these examples. how much that matters to each person will vary.
It's clickbait. Many amazing pictures can be taken with either, by much better photographers.
I had the problem with x-pro1. the colors are amazing in fujilfim but when I zoom on computer screen low light pictures had some kind of watercolor effect. that never happened with my sony a6000.
that is because only C1 knows how to handle Fuji files properly. the wormy effect is indeed awful!
@@miam1074 c1 means?
@@photographer8486 captureOne
Does it make sense if the Fujifilm excels at “social media” photography to get it in comparison to just using the latest iPhone? Bit on the fence and convenience of the phone feels like a major factor.
I prefer the Sony but then coming from an A7RM3, i knew i would. I grabbed a s/h RX1-r myself and what a bargain it was ok so its only got 24mp but thats plenty and do i really need 42 mp? Maybe if money isn’t an issue ill eventually go for the ,k 2 but as things stand I’m happy with my little mk1 version that only cost me £755!
It's a good thing there are multiple camera manufacturers with multiple options to cater to those that look for something different and works for them. If we all drove the same car or lived in the same style of house we'd have a lot of unhappy people.
Maybe I'm missing something. In the video you refer to the RX1R for a same price purchase, but that is discontinued and 24 Megapixel. Your vid write-up refers to the current MarkII which is 40 Megapixel and the RX1R II is double the cost of the new Fuji VI 40 megapixel? For double the money I'd hope for approx double the benefits. Sounds like it does give those benefits thus they are priced accordingly.
Correct, it's clickbait...
I am looking for compact beginner everyday camera system to learn photography, develop a shooting habit, composition, playing around with manual settings etc. What are some good options? (optional: works well in low light, must: compact)
I wanted to learn photography. So I got a used Sony A7s2. Then lens I got with it was damaged. I thought buying a zoom lens would help me practice diversely with different focal lengths. Bought the Tamron 24-70 f2.8. The thing is I don't keep my camera with me. I should have got a fixed focal length lens (which would have also been smaller) and a smaller camera so that I can keep this handy with me always. I need to practice more and more. The setup I have currently I just don't carry with me. I want to click pictures in low light during evening and night after office on weekdays. And on weekends any time.
Sony colours are sold for me ❤
Sony 👍😎 Great Video 😊
The Sony is great for scientist imaging, I think. But if you want to make photography, tell a story, share émotions, it's the Fuji. And that's what I live...
Other problems with the Fuji: cropped sensor = the aperture stops are only apparent apertures. I.e. cropped focal length is 35mm. But, optically, 23mm. So, max aperture if at 35mm is not actually f2.8, it is f5 equivalent (1.5 stops less). Dynamic range and high ISO performance of the RX1RII is not only far superior to the Fuji, but actually among the best of any camera on the market for full frame equivalent, even as of 2023. Check out DXOMark. The lens, the Zeiss Sonnar, is also one of the best 35mm lenses in its own right ever made. Coupled with the sensor, which it was designed to pair with, the sharpness, contrast, bokeh and edge to edge performance are all exceptional. There is no contest: the RX1Rii's only natural competitor is the Leica Q2/ Q3 (I say those as it is far superior to the first Q)
Thank you so much for this great video!
I've owned the X100V since it's release in 2020 and I have to disagree with you on the build quality.
I think it feels very premium and has survived several pretty gnarly drops.
As you mentioned though, the autofocus can be very hit or miss and it's absolute dog s**t at night without a denoise plug-in.
What makes the Fuji so appealing is the knobs and dials vs the Sony which is much more reliant on custom buttons which I find less intuitive.
That being said, I've been really interested in picking up the RX1R II and have to admit - current prices are very tempting!
Let me know how you like it if you do check the Sony out! Until then, capturing moments is what really matter, with whatever tool you choose.
I own four fujis, two have leica glass on them, the other the new voightlander manual 27mm, so i am used to manually focusing.
So on the x100v, I opt to use the “push to af” manual auto focus. In other words, you joystick to your spot and push to focus. When the crowd gets rowdy, i’ll opt for face select😂
Just something i’m used to.
When I tried the new 2023 bodies, the AF tracking was on par with modern competition!!! So if a new x100 comes out in the next two years, you can cross off your AF concerns!
Great video Tilly. Picking the ideal camera is always been trial and error I think . I shoot a cropped sensor Fuji X20 compact camera and a cropped sensor Nikon D7000 full sized camera. The Fuji has always impressed me with great images within its' capabilities and the Nikon ...using prime Nikon lenses...always impresses me as well. This being said I really enjoy shooting real film stock through my Nikon F5 35mm camera the most...truly a full frame camera experience! It seems that when I pick up my Nikon cameras I feel more "at home" with them in hand and make great images more often than not. Shooting a fixed lens camera is not for everybody and that would include me. I look forward to your next video...keep shootin'!
Bought an RX1R ii for 1600€ recently. Amazing camera! Except the battery which is horrible. Autofocus is pretty good too! I found sony menu okay but ricoh gr has the best menu's! For the quality we get froom the cambo full frame 35mm zeis Lens it worth every cent's!!!😀
I've used many, many different cameras since I started shooting in 1985. Along the way had m4/3, APS-C, full frame, and medium format. Best image quality is my Fujifilm GFX 50r medium format. The files are simply incredible. But, tied in first place is (well, was) my Sony RX1R. I've had several Fuji APS-C cameras: XT-1, X100S, X-Pro 2, and XT-3. In no way are the files from the Fuji cameras equal to the files of the Sony RX1R with that gorgeous Zeiss Sonnar T lens. The first time I uploaded images from the Sony RX1R to my computer, my jaw dropped on the floor. Just outstanding with tons of micro contrast and that 3-D pop. Those claiming that Fuji APS-C is just as good simply have not seen with their own eyes how an elite lens (Voigtlander/Leica/Zeiss) renders. There is no comparison. The sensor on a camera is important, but far more important is the lens you stick in front of it.. Give me a crap camera with a great lens any day over a great camera and a crap lens. BTW, The comparison shots were great-- also, I thought I recognized Rhett in your images-- I also subscribe to his channel :)
I enjoyed your review and don't dispute that the Sony is a better camera. However, I looked at the prices for the Sony, and I was unable to find them both for about the same price. The Sony seems significantly more expensive.
Actually the x100 line has builtin ND filter and a flash, which is very useable at times. Also, since I don't know and like to much to edit my photos I get the most beautiful photos straight out of my x100v.
I cant agree more.
And I am glad that someone said it clearly (they say the AF isnt very good, but they are nit very clear about)
You are helpung peaple to pick the rigjt camera.
Good video Tilly. I wanted a X100V for some time however it's lack of availability unless you're willing to pay almost double the price is not acceptable to me. I will take a look at the Sony rx1rii.
You can still buy a X100V if you order one, but you will have to wait up to 3-6 months. I got mine in May after a 6 months wait (I never thought I was going to get the order after 3 months) for the correct retail price of £1,300.
I think the X100V is an amazing camera, as long as you get all the settings right, you will always get very sharp images. And I’m someone who picks up on the most minute details of photos etc.
I couldn’t disagree with this Tilly more, some of her comparisons between the X100V and Sony RX1RII are not photos I recognise being shot by an X100V. There is also nothing cheap, about the look and feel of the X100V. I think the Sony RX1RII looks cheap, and I personally don’t like Sony cameras (for televisions etc it’s always Sony for me). And I think Tilly just has a natural dislike for the X100V, which is fine. But the camera does live up to it’s hype.
For me, I’ll always go with the camera and the pictures I don’t have to post process. I hate having to do that.
Sony should do Rx1riii with viewfinder like on fuji - with 61MP and 24mm lens with ability to crop to 28mm, 35mm ,50mm that would be awesome street camera
Thank you! Very interesting!
Totally agree. For me, if I buy a digital camera, id go for the digital aspect, to get sharp details and the dynamic range and color depth and full frame.
If I want film look, id just get an actual film camera, because film emulation is not satisfying to me, you know in your mind, that you're faking it and it can work in some places, but Id prefer the real thing, it would make me feel really happy
As for softer look, its not the same as low quality, because I can get the soft picture with certain lenses and filters and experiments, while the core of the picture would be good quality
I bought my X100V new for $1500 in 2020 and I recall Sony RX1R II was $3700 then so it was not a fair comparison spec-wise. And no way would I pay a camera more than its retail price. Your sample photos from X100V don’t look good, not sure if you set it up that way (underexposed, out of focus, washed out, off colour) or you got defective camera. I don’t own Sony mirrorless but have come close to buying A7 series on many occasions for wanting to move to FF. I have no doubt on the photo quality of Sony from each time I tried the camera but there was always something I don’t like about it. It just feels ‘soul-less’ and doesn’t inspire me. I ended up with Q2. Most recently, I was considering A7C / A7CR II as Sony has now many smaller good quality lenses but again the body feels ‘electronic’. I was ready to accept it but found out they didn’t upgrade their viewfinders, which was a pity and disappointing. Nikon Zf was released in time, and I’m a happy owner now. I’ll still be on the look out if one day Sony releases a camera with more ‘soul’ that inspires me… maybe the RX1R II successor, … maybe one day, I’ll be proud owner of Sony, but not today.
I only shot with the Sony RX1, for one year - 'one camera, one lens'. As a dedicated Fuji user, I find there's no contest when you put this up against an X100 series camera... Using just the RX1 made me a better photographer.
Great video, I was engaged the whole time and really want that camera now lol. Trying to figure out what I can sell ... 🤔
The Sony RX1 RII is a great Camera, but you could also go for a Sony A7RIIIA with a Sony Zeiss Sonnar 35mm 2.8 T* ZA.
You are absolutely correct. I still own an RX1r and still prefer the Sony. Had X100F and V. Sold them both.
Agree that for $2k, I’d rather buy the rx1r2 though I heard workflow is a bit challenging getting pics from sd card to smugmug or Flickr due to huge size.
Isn't t Sony's AF just as slow since Sony saved the better AF for their A serie series cameras? Or was that only on the MK i gen?
I personally went from a Sony SLT A57(aps-c) to a Fuji X-E1(when the X-T10 just came out) years ago, because I didn't bond with the Sony well. On paper it(Sony) was the better camera, but in the real world I enjoyed the Fuji more. Sure, I missed the tilting display, better EVF, better AF & a few Minolta lenses I had, but everything else on the X-E1 just worked better for me. As for IQ it was pretty much the same & really came down to preference.
Sony version 2 model anyday FF
If you have issues with the resolution of the fuji you lust either print on bilboards or do 200% crops all the time...
Dang, the low light performance of the X100V is an instant turn off for me. I see what you're saying about the out of focus look.
Great video, thanks for the comparison! I've had an X100V for years and love it. I'd love to get my hands on a Sony for my own comparison as well but every time I see images shared from them they just feel a bit lifeless. This is likely subjective, and I'm not sure if it's the bokeh or the colours or what but.. even in this video I still prefer the Fuji images. Although that doesn't erase the points of it's full frame capabilities and all.
images for the fuji look way more cinematic than the sony that look like more a smartphone photo, its an easy choice for me, fuji win ( and the bokeh from the fuji destroy complitely the sony in my taste)
I’m agreeing here mate. I have the Sony so was interested to see what she said. It’s as if the video is a troll because the 100v photos side by side are wayyyyyy nicer. I don’t know if the Sony was being shot wrong because yeah it looked like iPhone photos in comparison
You can get a new Fujifilm X-T5 with something like a 23mm F/2 for 2150$, Sony a7C with Tamron 24mm F/2.8 Di III OSD for 2000$, if for some reason you really need that full-frame sensor in a compact body, Canon EOS R8 for 1500$, if you're ready to trade a few inches for actually good ergonomics, or the latest Sony a6700 for 1400$ with some great lens options within remaining budget. Why even bother with a fixed lens(!) used digital camera from 2016(!) for 2k(!!!)? It doesn't even look like a vintage accessory, which is important when it comes to Fuji X100V.
Your photos are amazing though.
Size of the cameras you mentioned are not close to the rx1. Your ignoring the Zeiss lens also.
I must admit i assumed you were talking about the rx1r not the rx1r ii this whole time.
That Sony is not 2k it is almost like 3k and that Fuji is a 1.5k camera, so not a fair comparison. The image in the Fuji while grainy has more character IMO. It looks more film like and less digital. Some people prefer that.
I am an old school photographer (35 years professionally). I've shot practically every brand and type of film to digital camera during that period. I purchased the X100V a couple of years ago from Amazon because I missed the Fuji colors from my S1pro, S2pro and S5pro Fuji DSLR days and thought it would be a great everyday carry body. I'm in agreement with you 100%. Ive gotten some excellent images but the X100V does nothing special apart from nearly any current Fuji camera except maybe the leaf shutter. The film simulations are cool and if you are fine with being methodical, I get it. But again, nothing special. I'm trying to decide between the XT-5, Sony 6700 or Sony A7C to replace it. I'm just tired of fighting the X100. I don;t see it's flaws as character, I just see flaws. At the current price. Don't believe the hype.
It turns out that I like the images from both of the cameras. They are different but I like the not so good quality of the Fuji images as well.
Fuji X100V is a nice enthusiastic and travel camera, but it’s definitely not in the same league as a full frame Sony BSI camera with gorgeous Zeiss sonnar f2 lens..!
I'm a Olympus shooter for 18 years, and the x100 is my first camera away from the m4/3 system. Absolute, nothing about the 100v is accurate you are describing about it.
I realised many years ago that the Fuji x100 series is amazing camera only when it's the only camera around.
I had taken my new x100S to a wedding back in 2014 i think alongside my D600. The X100s images were just not on par. It's not that they weren't good.... but it just didn't look that great. It just didn't feel great in my hands. Just didn't feel like a proper camera...for holidays ...sure but not for paying jobs. I understand there are some pros who just work with X100 series cameras. I have no idea how they do it, but I am not that brave! I have shot film and digital since 1999 and have used all sorts of cameras but there is no way I would use one of these when customers are paying.
Just bought an rx1rii after watching this video. I think the gr3x is better than the Fuji x100 as an apsc edc.
Yes!
lol that comparison photo of the rocks makes no sense. the fuji is clearly using a wider aperture. and ironically it makes it look like it has better background separation. if they're both shot wide open or both at the same aperture i bet the results would have been noticeably different... also in the side by side my x100v is nowhere near as soft as yours... seems odd maybe you got a junk lens...my x100v has literally taken razor sharp photos...
God bless you for this video! I have had the Fuji X100V for years, and have never been impressed with it. People love them for the film recipes, and mainly for the Portra 400 recipe. I have been shooting film for years, and my Portra images aren't green like the ones that this camera produces. I ended up buying the Leica Q2, which is almost perfect.
Thank you for the support! I love my M6, and I know the Q2 is equally impressive. So glad you’re enjoying it!
Wait; You'r comparing a 42Mpx full frame $ 4000 camera to a 26Mpx APS-C $ 1500... And than you tricked the comparing images.. It's just not true. I use both camera's (plus several Nikon's) and the difference is mainly in the price and bit of dynamic range. of the x100v is not as good as the Sony, no. Comparison Sony to a Leica Q2 would haven been better. But then; I come from the film days and I love the approach of the Fuji with its analog layout. In my opinion it doesn't feel cheap in any way.
Brilliantly said and well spotted. ⚖️🎓📷
Sony full frame too but I don’t like that Fuji
😅 isnt the sony camera lile $3500 lol you could buy two of the new fujis for that
Totally agree with you - X100V is not about IQ.
After seeing your video, the x100v is certainly not for you, so you should sell it off.😊
Truth. 1st and second generation full frame cameras give better results than the fuji
The X100V feels cheap? Did Sony tell you say that? IMHO the Fuji camera is super well built and is a delight to handle. Image quality is very good. Each to their own of course. I know several long-term Sony owners who would probably agree with what you have to say about the RX1R. It certainly is a very attractive looking camera. Yes the X100V is pricey but not more so than the Sony.
It's not an uncommon comment made by photographers that use other high-end cameras.
Fuji S20 beats both
All Sony cameras are technically very good but they lack soul and for me I would have always picked the Fuji as in my opinion they are enjoyable and more engaging than the Sony. The Sony cameras are like Teslas, technically good but soul less compared to a European equivalent.
Also surprising you can’t get good quality out of the Fuji, the bokeh is perfect and the auto focus isn’t as bad as you make out.
I tried the Fuji. I just did not like it. It’s way over priced and I don’t great the hype. Now I never tried the Sony but always wanted to
I had two X100's (X100 and X100T). while it is a good camera, it is really overhyped. I moved on and got a Leica Q and it was the camera that the X100 couldn't be. Now the current X100 is overpriced, and the Leica Q can be found for the same or even lower price. The Sony has issues too such as battery life, and it is a Sony, meaning that it has complex menu structures and lots of buttons. lots of buttons get in the way.
You can take better pictures with the Fuji, if you want...
The Sony full frame is great but I’m not spending 2k on an ugly looking camera 😂
Sony app for phone is bad. that been so as others
Do Fuji fanboys not understand that film profiles are a software thing? The better the lens and sensor, the better your RAW files will be and the “soul” and “feel” Is best cooked up in post. People should complain that Sony shoot sterile or clinical images that just don’t have a great feel, don’t understand the importance of post with all digital cameras.
I am not a fanboy of any particular brand. I just happened to settle on the Sony A7RV as my main for getting those "sterile or clinical" perfect shots (wildlife, landscapes) -- after editing, of course. And yes, all files coming out of cameras are a software thing. Even Sony RAW files. With that said, I also have a Fujifilm X100V that goes EVERYWHERE with me as soon as I step out of the house (even on shoots that require my Sony setup).
Why? Two reasons:
1) I love the film simulation "software thing" coming out of the camera in where I don't have to even touch an editing software. In fact, I now only shoot JPG with my X100V (yes, it is that good to me) because getting imperfect "straight out of camera" is a feature and can sometimes suprise me, just like when I used to shoot film. The point is to emulate the experiences of shooting film without actually loading in a canister of film.
So why not just shoot film? Simple. I'm not rich enough to buy loads of films (for the many shooting mistakes I have and will continue to make) and paying for them to be developed.
2) There is this liberating/fun/satisfaction factor in shooting with a "simple" camera with a fix lens where you don't care so much about perfect photos. In fact, it's those imperfections and recipes that gives cameras like the X100V its character or "soul". It is how you set up YOUR recipe and the way that you shoot that makes these types of cameras (tools) uniquely yours. Your art, your "soul". It is the same reason why some people chose to put on old/relic/cheap lenses onto their latest and greatest cameras.
Again, it's the custom film recipes that you can add/create on top of the pre-built ones are what makes Fujifilm cameras truly enjoyable. If you get bored of one recipe or look, you can try another.
The OP said something about not liking a green tint to her photos. She could have easily customized the recipe she was using to remove that green tint. I'm afraid the OP just doesn't understand or have taken the time to understand her tools before making videos like this.
If you can’t make amazing photos with the x100v… the problem is you… not the camera.
She really provided a good point of view
All Sony cameras are technically very good but they lack soul and for me I would have always picked the Fuji as in my opinion they are enjoyable and more engaging than the Sony. The Sony cameras are like Teslas, technically good but soul less compared to a European equivalent.
Also surprising you can’t get good quality out of the Fuji, the bokeh is perfect and the auto focus isn’t as bad as you make out.
That’s with any camera
Me it’s just a preference
I can’t agree more … I have the Sony RXRii as well and it’s terrible in focusing. Let’s not even talk about video qualities which is very bad for a $3200 camera. I’d rather buy a Leica Q1 which will blow away the Sony. Also remember that this coming month on February 20, Fujifilm will announce the new successor to the Fujifilm X100V. And to top it all, remember that the Fujifilm X100V is Out-of-Stock everywhere. There is a reason for it. The Sony RXRii was a huge flop for Sony.
The Sony costs 2 times the money of the Fuji…..this comparison is silly.
it doesn't matter which one you get if you have no eye for a picture there both a waste of money
Comparing apples and oranges. The Sony is double the price. Not worth it.
Sony colours are terrible , like old kodak colours