Podcast: Fujifilm versus Sony

With deference to Linda Richman, today’s podcast offers its version of the Coffee Talk skit from Saturday Night Live—Fujifilm is for Artists/Sony is for Pros… discuss! We realize, of course, that any camera—used well—can be for professionals and for artists and that artists can be pros and vice versa; we’re not so naïve as to think otherwise. Given the parameters of the topic, however, we take on this idea in an open conversation that touches upon the marketing for these high-end mirrorless cameras, the empirical evidence on who is using them, and most important, the feature sets, lenses, and system accessories for these cameras. Three of our most trusted in-house experts join us to discuss their experiences with the Sony a7 series and the Fujifilm X series cameras as we attempt to clarify the most appropriate applications for each camera line. Now, I’m getting verklempt… so talk amongst yourselves.

Guests: Shawn Steiner, Justin Dise, Todd Vorenkamp


Don't miss an episode!
Subscribe on iTunes; Stitcher; and Google Play.

Todd Vorenkamp, Allan Weitz, Shawn Steiner and Justin Dise

Host: Allan Weitz
Senior Creative Producer: John Harris
Producer: Jason Tables
Executive Producers: Bryan Formhals, Lawrence Neves


If I want to reduce weight from my Canon 5D Mark 3's ...are there adaptors for Canon glass that maintain the speed and other factors of Canon glass for Sony A7R? Or do I need to sell all my Canon Glass to reduce weight in general. 

There are adapters that would enable you to mount Canon lenses onto the a7R, though you might lose autofocus depending on the lens you have.  For the best performance, you would want to switch to Sony lenses.  Adapters can be hit or miss when it comes to performance, and you can decrease weight going with mirrorless alternatives. 

Hi Jonathan

The question is what you expect. The pure body to body+adaptor difference will be around 950g (Canon) vs. 605g (A7R+Metabones MKIV). That is in my understanding not much. Regarding the lenses it depends on what lenses you have. It can be a proper weight reduction, or be  almost equally. Two examples would be a standard zoom 24-70mm. The f4 versions are 600g vs 420g in favor of Sony, the f2.8 are 950g vs 890g in favor of Sony.

If it's just the weight interesting to you, I would recommend to stay with Canon, because a complete brand change would cause you a big loss of money - unless 300g to 400g save are meaning the world for you. If there are certain features with the A7 series that are appealing to you, than go for Sony.

I am an Sony FE because the resolution, EVF and DR are killer criteria for me, so I accept the little flaws of an entire Sony only environment.

Hope to support your consideration

Best regards


If I want to reduce weight from my Canon 5D Mark 3's ...are there adaptors for Canon glass that maintain the speed and other factors of Canon glass for Sony A7R? Or do I need to sell all my Canon Glass to reduce weight in general. 

A few options with adaptors for the Sony A7 series. Metabones, Sigma and Commlite are the best choices from personal experience. Anywhere from 80-650 dollar range depending on which glass you own. All of these adaptors should maintain your aperture speeds just fine. 

Because of a near fatal spinal injury which nearly left me totally parallized, I had to trade my Canon full frame cameras and lenses for Fuji E2 S  and XT 1 because of weight.   What a joy they are.  I am having fun again doing what I love doing, even though I can still barely walk. Even if I improve physically, dramatically, I'll never go back to bigger DSLRs. Thanks Fuji

Great pod cast.  I use Nikon DSLR for full frame. I love the Fuji X-T1. Went all over Paris with it and a  23mm prime ---  small, low light, fast lens. The supplied micro flash is a weakness and didnt get good results as one of your guests mentioned although i will have to use apparture priority as he did. . I purchased a larger external flash -- still not perfect.  thanks 

I went from a Canon 60D to Sony 7r.  The only downside is the lack of lenses for the Sony.  Lens adapters are not the answer.  I've tried two adapters with less than adequate results.  As soon as the lens offerings for E-Mounts catch up to the other makes; I'll be happy.  The lack of a 400 mm or longer lens is a real bummer.  When I need a long lens, I have to go back to the Canon.  

Just interested in adding one of the Nikon APS / mirrorless cameras into this comparison, esp. if you have Nikon lenses. Is it worth it to switch ecosystems?

The Nikon 1 Mirrorless system cameras are using a much smaller sensor. While their speed is impressive, you’re still not going to have the same color replication, highlight/shadow detail or low light performance (especially with noise at higher ISO) that an APS-C or Full Frame sensor is capable of providing. For image quality I would not necessarily throw them in with the Fuji or Sony offerings, nor would I recommend a hasty jump in systems. 

  • I was an industrial photographer for a large defense/aerospace company, shooting super wide lenses in 4x5 and Hasselblad.  But when digital came out, I went with the Nikon, as I had many lenses and felt locked into their system for years.  When Fuji came out with their X system, I tried and purchased their X-Pro 1 and 10-24mm lens.  The feel and image quality reminded me of my Leica M-6 system.  I later purchased their X-E2 body and 5 more lenses and actually fell in love with photography again. I now had my X-1 Pro converted to IR and am now looking to acquire the X-Pro2.  My only  issue is that the X-Pro2 does not have a tilting screen which I need for my many low angle shots.  The Fuji X system is such a joy to use that it makes you want to go out and shoot all the time.     



Everyone seems to be missing the boat with regard to the Fuji X cameras.  Sonys (as well as Canons, most Nikons, etc.) deliberately blur the image to accomodate the sensor (antialiasing filter).  Fuji DOES NOT.  You get better, sharper images out of the Fuji than from the others.  That is the magic of the X-Trans sensor.  In this podcast, they are comparing apples to oranges, and considering both the Fuji and the Sony to be similar.  The Fuji is a different beast.

I upgraded from a Canon 7D to an X-E2 to an X-Pro2 and have never looked back.

Me, too. I stopped using my full-frame Canons in favor of the X-Pro II and the X-T1. I've been photographing non-stop since age 12, I am 65 now. I have never used a camera so perfect, and so purely pleasurable to use, especially for an old world photographer. I live in Colorado, but just flew to New York to photograph the remarkably powerful Bruce Conner VIP opening at MoMA (I was his darkroom printer, with many prints in the show, and one of my artist portraits of Bruce is on the cover of the catalog). I'm also a museum event, artist portrait and art documentation photographer, and I'm using the the Fujifilm cameras exclusively now. I've played with and tried the Sony cameras, but they just don't appeal to me. Also, the low-noise and detailed sharpness at high ISO with fantastic fast lenses make this an incomparable event, street and art camera. I create both pro and art photos with this camera; some of my artist portraits currently hang in the library of the Museum of Contemporary Art DENVER. At this point in my life, I mainly want a camera that gives great results that are slightly off-kilter from the norm to have a unique and beautiful personality, works in ways like a film camera, is durable, and is such a pleasure to use that I keep it with me at all times.

I own both the a7r2 and the XT-1, both cameras do not have AA filters, and they are both great.

No AA filter on the Sony a7r , a7rii ...

No longer true. Several Sony's Nikon's and now Canons leave out the blur filter you are talking about.  Further, regardless on one blurs or not, let the end results speak for themselves.

Steve's wrong on the AA filter and Sony. Some have an AA filter, some dont. And one, The RX1R2 has an optional AA filter that you can have either on or off. Ther are good reasons for having an AA filter for some purposes and in some situations.

Several Nikons (D7200, D810) and Sonys (A7R, RX1R) don't have AA filters.  Fuji X Trans is an acquired taste, some people love it and some don't but it's not apples to orages to put Sony against Fuji on that basis.

Loved the PodCast as I switched from a DSLR and  shoot exclusivly Fuji X-T1 with its stunning results.

Thank you for the informative podcast! I have a question for those participant using the Fuji X system and specifically the xt-1: I am currently using the XE1 and while I have been very happy with IQ, I have found its autofocus capabilities really sorely lacking. I am therefore wanting to upgrade my body, but I am going back and forth between going for the XT1 that is a great buy until this weeked, and going for the XT2 supposedly being revealed next week. I don't buy cameras frequently so I do wish to get the best "bang for the buck" if you will. I tend to shoot mainly street, portrait and landscape. Any thoughts?


The X-T1 is a great body. If budget is your main priority, it has vastly superior focusing abilities as well as other advantages over the X-E1. As for the sale ending, I suspect (but do not know) that you will continue to be able to get great deals on this body given the emminent announcement of the X-T2.

That said, if you can swing it, the X-T2 has 50% more pixels, a more flexible tilt-screen design, and a host of small improvements that taken together represent a significant refinement of the original. If you shoot video, the video on the X-T1 is unusable (IMO). That will not be the case for the X-T2. Given that you don't upgrade often, I wouldn't start out with an old body if you can afford the new one.

Very solid advice. I would just like to add that more is not always better, and that the improvements of the X-T2 may also bring disadvantages: Bigger image files for one thing, which might make additional investments necessary when it comes to your computer. I hadn't heard that video on the X-T2 will be vastly better, but I wouldn't be surprised if Fuji stayed focussed on photo and kept leaving video to others. I was so frustrated with the sad results I got with the X-T1 that I decided to get a Lumix G7 exclusively for video. Now I have a dedicated camera for each task, and it makes a lot of sense to me. With adapters I can use certain lenses on both cameras (with different results due to the different crop factors). My advice would be to wait a few more weeks and read a lot of reviews one the X-T2 comes out, while also watching what its appearance does to the X-T1's price tag ... 

It's my understanding that the Fuji X-T1's electronic shutter option allows for completely silent operation, while the Sony alphas do not.  

I haven’t had a chance to try all of Sony’s E-mount cameras with a Silent Shutter mode, but the few that I have tried (a7R II, a7S, and a7S II) have all been completely silent in the silent shutter mode (as long as you turn off the audio signals in the menu).   And, by all accounts, the a6300 is completely silent when using the silent shutter mode.

It is completely silent. I tried the XT-1, but wasn't impressed and bought an a6000 and then an a6300. I still use my Canon gear when using off-camera lighting, but most of my natural light stuff is with the Sony. To each his own.

I am able to do silent shutter on my Sony a7sii