fujifilm x-t200

Fujifilm X-T200 is a great choice for beginners

Fujifilm X T200 - mirrorless camera with APS-C sensor. This model belongs to Fujifilm's entry-level crop range. This is one of the most inexpensive cameras from this brand, along with Fujifilm X-A7.

A regular CMOS sensor is installed here, and not X-Trans, as in more expensive models. As my tests have shown (can be seen in the video review at the end of the video), this affects a slightly different color rendition and increased contrast relatively Fujifilm X-S10 with X-Trans sensor. This does not mean that your photos will be worse, they will be slightly different. In terms of working ISOs, I did not notice any significant differences. The camera confidently shoots up to ISO 2000, which Canon's crop can not boast of. Also, Crop from Canon cannot boast of 4K video without crop and with full-fledged autofocus. But there is also a catch.

What's the catch?

When you buy a cheaper camera, keep in mind that the manufacturer will certainly cut something in it. The Fujifilm X-T200 has drastically reduced its video settings. The camera does not give you the ability to adjust contrast and other video parameters. You can select film profiles, but you cannot control highlights and shadows. For newbies, this will not be a big loss. The camera can shoot high-quality video. But the ability to customize it for yourself is very limited. But you have HDR video modes (FullHD) and an electronic steadicam function (also only FullHD). How they work - see my video review at the end of the article.

The camera also consumes the battery very quickly.

What's positive about the X-T200?

Fujifilm X-T200 has the largest screen in modern crop cameras. Its diagonal is 3.5 inches, and its resolution is 2.7 million pixels. This is great. The screen is bright, high-quality and fully touch-sensitive. Incredible for Fujifilm, but even the menu is touch-sensitive! You can poke your finger anywhere, anytime. In this regard, in terms of ergonomics, this gizmo, I think, is even ahead of Canon M50 or Canon M6 Mark II.

fuji xt200 screen

Another plus is a high-quality and large viewfinder. Not a tiny loophole like on the aforementioned m50, but a big, good viewfinder.

The camera is pleasant to use, it looks stylish and has comfortable control. True, the Fujifilm X-T200 has only 2 assignable buttons, one of which I immediately identified to change the ISO. The second, by default, is responsible for calling the simplified menu for changing the shooting parameters and this can be left unchanged.

fuji xt200

Feelings in general

In general, I think this is a very attractive option in its segment. The camera is designed for beginners and will appeal to beginners. For advanced photographers or videographers, I would recommend the Fujifilm X-S10 /X-T3 / X-T4... The difference between the X-T200 and more expensive cameras is not that they are more beautiful / better shoot (as some may think), but in the fact that they make it possible to more flexibly configure the camera for themselves, have more buttons for control and some functions are not cut in them, the presence of which will not affect the activities of a novice photographer.

For more details, see my video review:

fujifilm gfx 100s

Review / Review Fujifilm GFX 100S

For a long time I dreamed about digital medium format... But the next test of such a camera dissuaded me. I dissuaded it not because the camera is bad (on the contrary, it is the top in its segment), but because I realized that I didn't need it. Many of the things in this review will be relevant to the attractive new GFX 50S II as well. These are very similar cameras.

Speaking specifically about the Fujifilm GFX 100S, then this is a very advantageous offer in its segment (similar in price Hasselblad X1D II 50c knows much less)... The GFX 100S can produce very high-quality photos with a resolution of 100MP, shoots detailed 4K video, has PixelShift technology, due to which you can take photos with a resolution of 400MP, has effective matrix stabilization (for photography).

fujifilm gf 80mm f1.7The possibilities are amazing. But not without a fly in the ointment. Autofocus is a compromise, despite the fact that here it is already phase, and not contrast, as in simpler models GFX 50... The weight and dimensions of the carcass + lens bundle are unpleasantly surprising after the usual full-frame mirrorless. This is a cumbersome and heavy technique. In this case, you will use very expensive lenses, but some of them have just disgusting autofocus. For example, the Fujinon GF 80mm f1.7 is an example of the worst autofocus I've ever tried. But in terms of detail and overall quality, it is unmatched, just like other GF lenses. Fujifilm produces top-end medium format optics, there is nothing to complain about. In its segment, it is very profitable - against the background of optics from the same Hasselblad.

Overall, I think the Fujifilm GFX medium format cameras are the best in their segment. The only question is, do you need all this? Heavy and bulky equipment designed for highly specialized use.

Fujifilm GFX 100S exterior

The grip is large, reminiscent of the Panasonic S1. The fingers do not sag. The screen is large, bright and of good quality. I liked the upper screen very much and can be adjusted to suit you. The viewfinder is so-so. Flickers even in good sunlight; with other settings it produces moiré and aliasing. In the photo, this, of course, is not. But it is unpleasant to be signed. Viewfinder quality is noticeably inferior to that of Fujifilm crop cameras, not to mention top-end R6, R5... There are many buttons on the case - you can assign whatever you want.

In terms of the menu, the camera is almost identical to my Fujifilm X-S10, with the exception of some nuances, which I will discuss in the video review at the end of the article.

Full frame or medium format?

The fact is that the top-end full frame wins a lot in terms of almost everything - autofocus, size, choice and weight of optics, video capabilities and much more. When I tested Fujifilm GFX 50R, I compared these photos with mine at that time Canon EOS... I was amazed at the detail, color depth, and flexibility of medium RAW files. Now, when I was comparing the GFX 100S to my Canon EOS R5, I was again amazed at the super-detail on medium format. 100 megapixels is not trick-or-treating. But in all other respects, the wow effect is gone. I think that the fact that I have already tested these medium format cameras more than once and have become somewhat accustomed to them played an important role.

Plus, Canon R5 is the top full frame to date (2021) and also produces very high quality RAW files with high dynamic range and good detail. 45 megapixels or 100 megapixels without specific tasks for printing banners 5 by 5 meters - and both are a lot. The meaning of extra megapixels is highly dependent on the use of the camera. Although, at 20MP I would no longer want to shoot.

Canon R5 - much more convenient and fast camera with much wider functionality. You can use it shoot sports, print wide-format banners, shoot reportage, subject, whatever. With GFX, all this will not work right away. Each focal length it will be very costly for you - both in money and in weight. At the same time, you do not have a large selection of optics, very few high-aperture lenses and, I repeat, these are all bulky bricks ...

By the way, the GFX 100S can shoot 16-bit RAW files. I did not notice any difference from 14-bit, but someone will be pleased.

In terms of color rendering, the GFX 100S reminded me of the second series of Fujifilm crops (X-T20, X-T2, X-H1, etc.) - noticeably pinkish. The color of RAW files is noticeably fading into cool shades. This is easily fixable, but the new crops from the same Fujifilm are removed more correctly.

GFX 100S RAW File Size:

  • uncompressed 200MB
  • lossless compression ~ 100-120MB
  • lossy compression ~ 80MB

for comparison, RAW files from Canon R5:

  • uncompressed 45MB
  • with ~ 20MB compression

The GFX 100S captures sharp 4K video without skipping lines across the entire sensor. It's great, but the quality of autofocus in video is very controversial. Autofocus is significantly inferior to autofocus of Fujifilm crop cameras, I am silent about Canon. As for the size of the sensor for shooting video, I don't think it's worth chasing. Crop cameras already provide ample quality for 4K video.

So why do you need such a camera?

Fujifilm GFX 100S is needed for people who set specific goals and are engaged in staged shooting. This is a type of shooting when everyone works for several hours to prepare 2-3 frames for shooting. The team is gathering, getting ready location, props, clothes, makeup, a complex lighting scheme is built, and then one successful expensive shot is taken and everyone diverges.

Such a camera not calculated the fact that she will be dragged anywhere in order to shoot anyhow. You can do this, but it would be pointless given other healthier alternatives. This is not a travel camera travel it will be uncomfortable with such a camera for a number of reasons. You won't bomb weddings with such a thing. You can try to do all this, but it is inconvenient and stupid. A medium format has not been created for this and no one will appreciate it.

The conclusion is Is a cool tool for anyone looking at a camera for a specific task. Buying a medium format like a cool big die toy is a bad option. There is more headache than pleasure. This is my conclusion. The difference from the full frame is completely out of proportion to all the attendant inconveniences.

About matrix size

Let me remind you that the size of the matrix on the GFX system is 44mm by 33mm, versus 36mm by 24mm in the full frame. The crop factor is 1.27, which is noticeably less than 1.5 when we compare the full frame with the crop.

fujifilmgfx 100s vs canon r5 vs crop

Another joke is that you get the main increase in the size of the matrix in the vertical direction. The width of the frame does not increase much. My video review will show the difference between the GF 80mm f1.7 and EF 85mm f1.4... This is clearly not something to consider upgrading for. I've found that a top-end full frame is a more attractive device for most discerning photographers and hobbyists alike.

Medium Format Magic - the thing is very subjective and relies solely on your faith and perception. My faith has dried up. Fujifilm crop cameras for me they became even more attractive due to their small size and wide functionality both in video and in photos.

pergear 35 f1.2

Pergear 35mm f1.2 review for crop mirrorless cameras

Pergear 35mm f1.2 Is a fast non-autofocus (manual) lens for mirrorless cameras with crop sensors.

I'll get down to business right away, optically it is a very compromise. On bpergear 35 f1.2At close focusing distances, the detail is mediocre. When focusing at infinity, you can get good sharpness, but the result is unstable. Some shots are sharp, some are not. Moreover, it's not about manual focusing. The quality of the optical system is questionable. Nevertheless, despite all this, the lens may be of interest to enthusiasts of interesting bikes. The background blur is nice and soft.

Examples of bikes on Pergear 35mm f1.2:

 

A panorama stitched from 7 frames shot on Fujifilm X-S10 + Pergear 35mm f1.2:

pergear 35mm f1.2 panorama

The lens has an aperture of f1.2, and I personally noticed that it gives a stronger blur compared to ttartisan 35mm f1.4.

pergear vs ttartisan

The lens from ttartisan is of higher quality optically and gives a predictable result. You can close it down to f5.6 and get very good sharpness. The same cannot be said about the analog from Pergear. However, I liked the bokeh in difficult conditions better on the Pergear 35mm f1.2.

The verdict is this: a lens for creative photography, not for viewing pixels.

(I.e. Buy Pergear 35mm f1.2 on Aliexpress

For more details, see my video review: