Weddings - Moving from Fuji to Sony

roc1

roc1

Suspended / Banned
Messages
393
Edit My Images
No
Been shooting with 2 Fuji X-Pro2's for the last few years after selling my Canon gear which has been great, but can't help but notice what folk have been saying about the new Sony's (A9 / A7iii etc). The eye AF sounds great and their native lenses have come on leaps and bounds in the last year or so.

So wanted to ask who here has gone from Fuji to Sony recently and how they are finding it. Obvs it's taking a step back to having bigger lenses, but part of me has missed the full frame look.

The A9 also seems to be resistant to banding whilst using the electronic shutter which is also a big appeal to me as nearly everywhere now has led lighting.

A7iii is about £2k at the mo, or the A9 (which I had discounted due to the crazy £4k price tag) I've seen is £2,800 with Panamoz which would make it a contender.
 
roc1 said:
Been shooting with 2 Fuji X-Pro2's for the last few years after selling my Canon gear which has been great, but can't help but notice what folk have been saying about the new Sony's (A9 / A7iii etc). The eye AF sounds great and their native lenses have come on leaps and bounds in the last year or so.

So wanted to ask who here has gone from Fuji to Sony recently and how they are finding it. Obvs it's taking a step back to having bigger lenses, but part of me has missed the full frame look.

The A9 also seems to be resistant to banding whilst using the electronic shutter which is also a big appeal to me as nearly everywhere now has led lighting.

A7iii is about £2k at the mo, or the A9 (which I had discounted due to the crazy £4k price tag) I've seen is £2,800 with Panamoz which would make it a contender.
Click to expand...

Hi,

I have been has both systems, went Sony -> Fuji -> Sony.
The Eye-AF is a game change for portrait work / weddings etc, you can also program in the faces in the camera as priority persons of interest etc.
Yes, the heavy and costly lenses is a negative but for me, it was worth it.
The Sony A9 is not 100% banding free as it can happen in rare conditions / LED's but nothing comes close to its silent shutter abilities.
The Sony A7 III is a very good camera for the money.

I own both and think its a formidable combination. :D
 
Shooting 1/100 in churches has sorted any banding issues for me with the A7III, and the IBIS makes it possible.

I owned an XT2 and it doesn't compare to the A7III for pro work. The Sony is streets ahead and ideal for weddings.
 
Ordering from Panamoz is not without risk, if the package gets pulled in by customs you'd face a hefty charge which will bring it back more in line with UK pricing. I know many have had great success ordering from these Chinese sites, but many others have had to fork out that 22% customs and excise charge plus a further payment for their 'inconvenience' - hopefully you'll be lucky
 
Thanks for the replies. I think Panamoz ship from a UK warehouse which avoids any duty issues...
 
roc1 said:
Thanks for the replies. I think Panamoz ship from a UK warehouse which avoids any duty issues...
Click to expand...


That would be much safer for sure. I've been stung a couple of times in the past with smaller items from Chinese warehouses. Bought a Yongnuo flash that was only €60 at the time, but ended up paying 90 after charges and extra postage fees - it also took them 3 weeks to send it on, and that was after I had to send them proof of purchase, the amount paid [so they could work out what to tax] and actually paid the charges
 
Cagey75 said:
Ordering from Panamoz is not without risk, if the package gets pulled in by customs you'd face a hefty charge which will bring it back more in line with UK pricing. I know many have had great success ordering from these Chinese sites, but many others have had to fork out that 22% customs and excise charge plus a further payment for their 'inconvenience' - hopefully you'll be lucky
Click to expand...

I thought Panamoz compensated any customs charges that are levied? They certainly used to.
 
decigallen said:
I thought Panamoz compensated any customs charges that are levied? They certainly used to.
Click to expand...

Didn't know this, good stuff of that is the case. I've been afraid to try them, customs over here seem steicter than the UK
 
I have never owned latest fuji (last one I owned was XT1) but I have repeatedly dabbled with them. Sonys 3rd gen bodies with availability fast focussing lenses are way ahead for shooting people in general compared to anything fuji has at the moment. eye-AF tracking is just magic, and not having to worry about having the eyes in focus and only thinking about artistic side of things makes the whole experience better (also yields in better results).
 
nandbytes said:
I have never owned latest fuji (last one I owned was XT1) but I have repeatedly dabbled with them. Sonys 3rd gen bodies with availability fast focussing lenses are way ahead for shooting people in general compared to anything fuji has at the moment. eye-AF tracking is just magic, and not having to worry about having the eyes in focus and only thinking about artistic side of things makes the whole experience better (also yields in better results).
Click to expand...
If you've never owned an Xh-1 how can you say that ?
 
imattersuk said:
If you've never owned an Xh-1 how can you say that ?
Click to expand...

As I said I have repeatedly dabbled with it but I admit my experience should be taken with grain of salt since I haven't used it as much (hence the disclaimer at the start saying I haven't owned it).
Having said that just the plain fact that Sony can do excellent eye-AF tracking (i.e. in AF-C) with fantastic hit-rate and fuji can't makes Sony better for shooting subjects with eyes that move around which is kinda the main theme in weddings ;)
Fuji's eye-AF doesn't have the same accuracy or snap as sony's. But fuji does have a nice select left/right eye priority setting which sony is missing (though not a something to be messing around with in dynamic wedding situations but makes for a nice addition for staged shoots).
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Eye tracking? seriously? This is a make or break for wedding photography nowadays?
Click to expand...

It's not about make or break, people shot weddings pre-AF and pre-digital advancements. It's about having the right tool or the most effective tool for the job. For weddings eye tracking is certainly a feature that'll help in delivering better results for the clients and who wouldn't want that ;)
When technology is available you might as well make good use of it for your and clients benefit. :)
 
You are making a lot of assumptions, there's plenty of weddings these days that are shot in a documentary style, no emphasis on sharpness, group shots, numerous portraits etc. In fact i've just paid for such a photographer as we wanted a story not super sharp portraits.
 
imattersuk said:
You are making a lot of assumptions, there's plenty of weddings these days that are shot in a documentary style, no emphasis on sharpness, group shots, numerous portraits etc. In fact i've just paid for such a photographer as we wanted a story not super sharp portraits.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you want the sharpness together with the story?

Best of both.

eVCWJfZ.jpg


iQ6JxM6.jpg


UuyO92x.jpg


Lhyelup.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yep very similar to your style Ray, very similar indeed in terms of quality.
 
As Ray said why not have both when it's an option.
Having sharpnees and a story is not mutually exclusive by any means. Both are important aspects in thier own right and shouldn't take away from the other to achieve one.
 
I’m following this with interest as I’m fully invested in Fuji, but my first love has always been Sony. I kind of fell into Fuji and now I’m getting itchy feet and GAS
 
imattersuk said:
You are making a lot of assumptions, there's plenty of weddings these days that are shot in a documentary style, no emphasis on sharpness, group shots, numerous portraits etc. In fact i've just paid for such a photographer as we wanted a story not super sharp portraits.
Click to expand...
You are assuming eye AF tracking is for portraits? In fact Fujis eye AF is plenty good for that. Sony is more useful for dynamic scenarios like Ray showed in examples above.
 
I could image that eye tracking would let you get away with using wider apertures than would normally be 'safe' while guaranteeing crisp images where it counted. The flip side for the photographer is likely to be less work in post, with fewer failures and less missed shots to cull - I find it's checking shots for critical sharpness before deciding which to keep or bin is the most time consuming part of culling. Speaking in general terms, since I have neither current Sony, nor Fuji.
 
NickTB said:
I’m following this with interest as I’m fully invested in Fuji, but my first love has always been Sony. I kind of fell into Fuji and now I’m getting itchy feet and GAS
Click to expand...
If you are fully invested and it's working well for you then it's probably prudent to continue using it. I am by no means suggesting people to drop their Fuji gear overnight and move to Sony lol.
Since OP question was specifically about moving to Sony for wedding I felt it'd be beneficial to do so for his case only
 
Last edited:
Our photographer had Nikon D750's, my point is there's a line and when you go over it then it's a case of diminishing returns on investment. Don't forget the OP must have some Fuji glass too. Then there's the Sony menus to learn.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I could image that eye tracking would let you get away with using wider apertures than would normally be 'safe' while guaranteeing crisp images where it counted. The flip side for the photographer is likely to be less work in post, with fewer failures and less missed shots to cull - I find it's checking shots for critical sharpness before deciding which to keep or bin is the most time consuming part of culling. Speaking in general terms, since I have neither current Sony, nor Fuji.
Click to expand...
It's less work on the whole. Even while photographing you don't need to worry about moving focus points or chimping after taking the shot. You can simply concentrate on finer points and composing which in itself is highly beneficial for getting better photographs aNd coverage throughout event.
 
imattersuk said:
Our photographer had Nikon D750's, my point is there's a line and when you go over it then it's a case of diminishing returns on investment. Don't forget the OP must have some Fuji glass too. Then there's the Sony menus to learn.
Click to expand...

our wedding photographer had a D700 and a D810 (odd combination I thought when he showed up with those on the day) but in the end results I could really tell the difference unless I went looking for it (I bet majority of people won't be to able tell since they don't know where or care enough to look).

Sony menu's can be largely ignored after setting it up. so after the first couple of hours with the body you'll seldom dive into menus.

I agree there is diminishing returns and as I mentioned above I am not suggesting everyone fuji should dump it now. If OP is entertaining the idea, certain features of the sony system is more beneficial and worth the extra investment IMO.

I don't know why we went down the route of just debating eye-AF. There are useful things on Sony, other feature I mentioned was faster AF lenses. The typical 35/85mm combo is rather slow on Fuji especially that 56mm/1.2. The equivalent Sony 85mm/1.8 is blazing fast for example. Not mention you can get shallower DoF with FF and better ISO performance.
 
They all can do the same thing and they all can do the same thing very well.

That's a fact.

However (as I am shooting RAW), I don't think there is anything i find the Fuji system to be better than the Sony…I've not tried the X-T2 or X-Pro2 besides in the shop, but besides the size, the price, in pure tech terms. I personally think the Sony is a more capable camera.

Before anyone goes off on one, note that I am not saying the Fuji isn't capable, it's just if the Fuji is like 90%, the Sony is 95%, is that 5% worth it to you? I doubt the average joe can tell though. It's all relative to your circumstances.
 
imattersuk said:
Our photographer had Nikon D750's, my point is there's a line and when you go over it then it's a case of diminishing returns on investment. Don't forget the OP must have some Fuji glass too. Then there's the Sony menus to learn.
Click to expand...
Not made a decision on switching as yet, as you say I'll have a shortfall of about £4k to find once I've traded in my Fuji kit, so it will probably be something I'd do end of wedding season if anything, but it's certainly great to see more and more choice out there now.

When Sony's first started appearing I didn't even give them a second look due to lack of native glass mainly, but now they have definitely caught my eye.

Do couples care what I photograph with so long as they like my work. Nah. Do I have g.a.s.? You bet! :)
 
roc1 said:
Not made a decision on switching as yet, as you say I'll have a shortfall of about £4k to find once I've traded in my Fuji kit, so it will probably be something I'd do end of wedding season if anything, but it's certainly great to see more and more choice out there now.

When Sony's first started appearing I didn't even give them a second look due to lack of native glass mainly, but now they have definitely caught my eye.

Do couples care what I photograph with so long as they like my work. Nah. Do I have g.a.s.? You bet! :)
Click to expand...

But everyone are amazed at the first time they see Eye-AF, seriously.
 
nandbytes said:
our wedding photographer had a D700 and a D810 (odd combination I thought when he showed up with those on the day) but in the end results I could really tell the difference unless I went looking for it (I bet majority of people won't be to able tell since they don't know where or care enough to look).

Sony menu's can be largely ignored after setting it up. so after the first couple of hours with the body you'll seldom dive into menus.

I agree there is diminishing returns and as I mentioned above I am not suggesting everyone fuji should dump it now. If OP is entertaining the idea, certain features of the sony system is more beneficial and worth the extra investment IMO.

I don't know why we went down the route of just debating eye-AF. There are useful things on Sony, other feature I mentioned was faster AF lenses. The typical 35/85mm combo is rather slow on Fuji especially that 56mm/1.2. The equivalent Sony 85mm/1.8 is blazing fast for example. Not mention you can get shallower DoF with FF and better ISO performance.
Click to expand...
Yeah the glass is lovely on the 56mm but I will say I've missed moments with it due the slow-ish AF
 
roc1 said:
Yeah the glass is lovely on the 56mm but I will say I've missed moments with it due the slow-ish AF
Click to expand...

there is plenty of lovely glass on all brands :)

But what good is lovely glass if it doesn't give you good keepers or if you can't rely on it ;)
 
nandbytes said:
there is plenty of lovely glass on all brands :)

But what good is lovely glass if it doesn't give you good keepers or if you can't rely on it ;)
Click to expand...

As a D610 owner, don't talk to me about AF performance. :-((
 
I never get the whole terrible AF thing, I had the old X-T1 and found it plenty good enough in low light, I did also have the Xpro1, that was a bit of a snail alright, lovely camera but forget it for anything serious. The X-T2 and certainly the XH1 are more than capable AF-wise for weddings. It's not like everyone's running about Usain Bolt speed!
 
I've shot weddings with both Fuji and Sony (at the same time!)

Sony a7RII, Zeiss 55mm 1.8
Fuji X-T20, Fujinon 56mm 1.2

Remarkably difficult to tell the difference apart from the focal length, particuarly in good light, it was only really the evenings where the Sony pulled ahead. The main thing I noticed is that Sony files have an awful lot of scope for recovery if the exposure is off with very little downside. The Fuji isn't bad but really only pops when you nail exposure.

I'm 100% Sony now, but if the Fuji had the glass I wanted I would've happily gone with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top