I'm sorry for your loss.

I’m sorry for your loss man.

Or focus on both, like they did.

Hi! Just curious, what frustrated you about the flip screen? I don't have an L bracket, but I do have a 6D Mark II and have considered getting an L bracket.Thanks!

@@ricardopaquino I found that with the L bracket fitted i could not use the flip screen fully. The shorter side of the L stopped the screen articulating fully.

I made that jump and love the XT3, makes auto focus much faster on old fuji lenses, my lived 35mm f1.4 is now a far better auto focus lens, no hunting and faster.

Agreed

Agreed

Rather pointless comment.

But also, as a video person, I don't want an articulating screen either, I don't film my self ever.

Well it's the best hybrid camera out right now and in my opinion I would say it is just as much a video camera as it is a photography camera. I've used the camera in proper productions and it has not let me down. Also, most productions use a video assist/video recorder externally so a flippy screen really makes no difference in the work flow.

I agree.

I agree as well.

I share the same sentiments as well!

I agree, particularly on the screen!

Totally agree 100%. I shoot stills and the screen is ideal just the way it's designed. I've never had an issue with the battery life, I shoot about 350 stills and a dozen of those were long exposures over 2 minutes and I didn't need to swap batteries. IBIS would be cool but I have steady hands and primarily use a tripod anyway. The majority of users probably compose a decent image anyway, if they spend half of their time actually learning about light, composition and editing then all these little insignificant camera specs wouldn't be such a big deal in the first place.

@Ryan Ruark, please elaborate on how Fuji has made your photography fun again as opposed to Canon. I use a 5D Mk 3, and I have to admit, photography hasn't been as fun as when I had a 1D Mk 2n or a 10D before that. Is it really the camera?

​@@user-bd6bx6py7d So I (embarrassingly) lost my 5D Mark III recently and was in the market for a new DSLR. I had the 5D for about 2-3 years at that point and it's been an absolute work-horse. I've shot rocket-launches, airshows, portraits, astrophotography, and landscapes with it. Prior to the 5D Mark III, I had a Canon T3i for five years, so I've been a Canon shooter for most of my life. When I was in the market for a new camera, the XT-3 just came out and it had a lot of features that really made the 5D show it's true age. I also wasn't really jazzed with how Canon was neglecting video shooters with all the filming limitations of the 5D Mark IV. Ultimately, the price was what really sold me on the XT-3. I completely agree with you about the lenses. Because I always have my camera with me, my lens selection is limited to ones that are rated as Weather Resistance, since I often shoot in the rain. I also just bought the 16-55mm f/2.8 because the 50-140mm f/2.8 was out of my price range sadly. With the 16-55mm, I doubt I'll be able to cover all the topics/disciplines I did with my 5D Mark III and current selection of Canon lenses.

@Timewarp, I'm a 5D Mark III user. I like it, but I don't love it like I did my 1D Mk 2N, and my 10D before that. I'm thinking about Fuji, and was wondering if it accepts Canon lenses?

​@@imagesfromLA So the Fuji XT-3 uses an XF mount (it probably means "cropped-full frame"). While you can get adapters to go from EF to XF, you lose AF and IS on the Canon lens as most adapters don't have the electronic contacts. Additionally, you'll need to "set" the lens aperture you want to use on the Canon body, remove the lens, and then mount it to the XT-3. I've used the 1DX Mark IV before, but honestly prefer the 5D Mark III. My school's newspaper actually still has a 10D and 20D, but we keep them for display. I will say that a lot of people, including myself, aren't too happy with the current selection of XF lenses offered by Fuji. The quality of the lens and images make them really good, but the focal lengths are very staggered in my opinion. Additionally, third party lens manufacturers, like Sigma, have no plans on working with Fuji to make alternative lenses.

@86Timewarp, thanks for the great information. I think I'll rent the XT-3, and decide if it's worth going all in for. I love those school newspapers, which is where I was when I decided to get my first digital camera, the 10D.

@@imagesfromLA Nice man! My newspaper covers rocket launches at Cape Canaveral, so we sometimes use older, legacy cameras as pad/remote cameras to cover the actual launch. I chose the XT-3 because it was cheaper, had , a higher MP count, had better video capabilities, and was weather resistant. It really made the 5D Mark III show its age, but I know many folks who still use a Mark III and even a Mark II as their daily driver. I will say the it did take me a considerable amount of time to get comfortable with the XT-3. It does a lot of what the 5D Mark III can, but it has some quirks. I found that the image displayed in the EF is brighter than what comes out of the camera. Because of this, a lot of my photos generally need a 0.5 to 1 stop brightness increase because I dont want to over exposure and lose data. Also, I learned the hard way that my Canon flashes no longer work with Fujifilm. Fuji uses TTL as opposed to E-TTL.

I agree. There's not much here thats any different from other reviews. That being said, having shot for 3 full professional motor racing seasons with an X-T2 and X-T3 for 10 days and a long national championships race weekend, there's not that much between them, aside from the video functionality. IMHO, not enough for me to sell my X-T2 and get an X-T3. If you require eye-focus, focus at -3EV or video, then the X-T3 is a step up. For "general stills photography", personally, there's not enough of a difference for me to upgrade. The nicest feature, IMHO, is the higher res EVF.

Len Laughridge I agree, it seems that there are no great X-T3 expert videos to be found yet. So much can be covered. Apart from what you mentioned there are some funky menu shortcuts and even some quirks, like it not showing the ISO when you use an auto ISO mode with back button focus. But for me even just covering some of the film simulations from a broad (non-Fuji) science perspective would add tremendous value.

Love my XT1, just got the XT3 and focus is greatly improved. My old formerly slowish focusing 35mm f1.4 awsome sharp light weight fast lens is greatly improved on the XT3, no hunting and much faster focussing. True with all my old fuji lenses.

Are you new on the internet? :D

Wow really? I've been here since 517k subs... peasant

If youre into famous photographers, check out the 'photographers' playlist. Really great stuff. Nothing like it on the internet in terms of photography and quality.

Satchell Drakes Where’d you go man!? Need more of your case studies from back then

> as they can negatively affect the image But... you can turn it off. It should have IBIS. All cameras should.

@@sixthdutch You realize there is no turning IBIS off per say, you're just locking the mirror in one position. So you're still using all the battery, the mechanism is still taking up all the space, and for someone who never needs or wants it in the first place, these make the camera bigger and the battery smaller. Apparently the mechanism also affects cooling efficiencies, not being able to have a heatsink directly attached (I'll take other people's words on that/I have no experience there). Long story short, there's still trade-offs for including it and I go back to my closing statement about appreciating the fact that they sell different lines for different people. If you require or desire IBIS, you have options, why can't other people have options too?

@@PJ-ku5lp I would consider those more of design challenges to be mitigated instead of hard cons to IBIS. It's such a beneficial feature that I don't think any of those things are significant enough to warrant not having it. I have no idea how anyone wouldn't want it, it's insane how much lower you can go in shutter speed while handheld. Do people only shoot in daylight and use tripods and slow shutters at night or indoors? But, it's an interesting perspective, this is the first time I've ever seen anyone argue against including it. That makes me feel like Fuji isn't listening to their customers and not including it, they're just trying to segment features and get people to buy a more expensive camera for the feature.

@@sixthdutch Well that's certainly a victim's mentality, why not make the more obvious observation that they're offering cameras at lower price points for people who don't want the feature? Clearly the less complex design of a sensor directly on the main board, sans an entire extra mechanism is going to be cheaper to design and build. Are you saying they should artificially increase the X-T3 price to that of the X-H series? Weird thought process. And I agree, good design can mitigate a lot of problems, but physics is a real nag. A sensor with an IBIS mechanism is always going to be bigger than just the sensor. Have you ever seen one outside of the camera? It is not insignificant. I'm still curious why a company offering consumers options through different product lines is a bad thing. You want IBIS? Terrific, they made the X-H line just for you, the hybrid shooter. The success of the X-T line speaks for itself, however. I'm certainly not the only one who doesn't want or need that technology. Take care

I'm going to amend here that I think people get all bent out of shape trying to attach every feature to every new camera because of how they're launched. If the launched the X-H2 alongside the X-T3 and basically did like automakers do and update the whole fleet at once, people would be more likely to understand and accept the concept of different models for different consumers. Instead, when they launch the X-T3, everyone gets tunnel vision that THIS is the next newest camera and it should represent every last innovation and feature known to man, otherwise its a failure. So, there ya go, I blame the camera industry for how they release stuff. :)

It's for people who want to film themselves.

@@DylanHaskin yes I perfectly understand. But jf you don't plan to film yourself, in my opinion it's better just an articulated screen without the the need to flip it. The point is that most of reviewers on youtube needs this feature, but they take for granted that everybody does, without specifying that some people are betrer off without it. 😊😊

​@@aymanmehdi1352 I was just answering your question :)

I wish my a6500's screen would flip sideways like Fuji's. :(

I'm with you Ayman on this one. A flip screen isn't a necessity for me, and I doubt it is a necessity for most people too.

fine to me

@@ArizonaMMJ He has Bluetooth headphones with latency...

I thought the same Alex

Yep. Definitely out of sync.

I really like his videos yet this synchronization problem kicked in repeatedly when I watched him speaking. I believe he doesn’t want to see it happen by any means.

Steve Healy While I agree with this for my own uses, I don’t think it is practical for Fuji to do it. I think hybrid shooters are becoming ever more prominent today both in the professional and the enthusiast realms, and also more prominent in everyday technology (phones). A video only Fuji camera simply wouldn’t sell well IMO. Those that want only video will buy a Canon or Sony, and those less serious will be fine with the phone.

I don't care much for the video features but there are things companies must do to compete. I believe a big reason so many photographers are using Sony is because they have developed somewhat of a one size fits all solution for creatives that are doing both stills and video. I don't care for Sony's cameras (I'm a Nikon guy considering Fuji as an addition to my kit) but I do see why some photographers use them. I like what I see coming from Fuji and I want them to thrive and be around for years to come... so if working on a video features is going to help them stay alive go for it (but Fuji don't forget to improve that image quality while you working on that video).

i see your point but you're looking for a leica. hybrid shooting is the way forward for professionals nowadays and any company that hopes to establish themselves as a viable professional brand cannot afford to neglect video.

@@verselines Suggesting someone needs to get a Leica because they want a body that's primarily oriented toward stills shooters is nothing short of absurd. "You don't want a pickup truck? Then you're looking for a Maserati!" Fujifilm makes what, 8 different X-mount bodies? I don't find it illogical to wish one was primarily geared towards stills shooters. It would appear Fujifilm doesn't either, as the X-T line is clearly a stills-first body.

​@@PJ-ku5lp that's just the market nowadays. only brands like leica and ricoh (with the gr) with no illusions about penetrating the professional market can continue to bank on producing 'cult' cameras that appeal to purist still shooters as their main product. as for your suggestion - come to think of it, fuji already has a stills-oriented camera for the romantic purists - the x100 series. but they are obviously looking to appeal to working pros as well.

@@mattboggs6304 I was facetiously referring to taking photos, not video, Mr. Serious.

So true. Weird how pre stabilization manual focus photographers of the past took awsome photos of sports, action and stills in focus with no stabilization. Ibis is just a crutch for those that can't hold a camera still, a nice beginners feature.

Best pro tip for all those people complaining

It was long ago photographers had the skill to operate fully manual cameras and manual focus lenses getting great in focus images, and still and fast action sports shots. IBS is just a tool, and not required for photography, but better to not have it so photographers learn how to hold a camera still, a learned practiced skill missing from many modern photographers that rely on crutches like IBS and it's limitations wondering why there images are blurry with Ibis on.

It's weird that my XT3 gets sharp images of action and stills using old manual focus lenses with, and hand held, and no Ibis, but no lense stabilizing electronics...

I was thinking the same. No reason to switch from X-T2 (unless it breaks, of course).

Yunlu Zhu I’m not sure what features the xt3 adds besides better face detection that would help specifically for portraits. But as someone who also owns an xt2 and does dabble in portraiture, I too cannot find enough reason to upgrade. For action and video, the benefits are quite real.

​@@buddyWalrus You are right. I am really looking forward to what Fujifilm will offer in the future. Love this system. But in the end, gear is gear, photography is photography. Buy less gear and shoot more photos.

Yunlu Zhu The xt 2 doesn’t really have limitations when shooting portraits. It’s good enough, unless you specifically are talking about face/eye detection.

MrTShbib I don’t have much experience with portraits. I’ve just seen many people talking about how Sony’s face/eye detection helps a lot during shooting (there are also many people getting brilliant shots with manual lens). I just thought these functions may be important for portrait shooters. Thanks for your input.

100% agreed with you. No flip out screen for Fuji forever!

I've got to know, what is it about this camera that's reviving people's love for photography? I'm seriously bored with my 5D Mk 3.

@@imagesfromLA It's particularly the more mechanical dials and old school form factor. The dials are a reminder of when I first used a camera as a kid and are a wonderful throwback. But for why people love it, it's because of how the camera functions. It's like those old SLRs and everything is as you see it. And sure, I suppose you could translate everything to a normal DSLR but it's not the same soul/feeling. Personally, it's like a manual vs auto. Some people like the drive and go of the auto and in some cases, it beats manual. But the manual has it beat on driving engagement and allure. Something about the manual feels so connected and it's OK to not be the fastest or the best on the track but you sure are having fun.

Wow! I guess I better rent an XT3, and see if I'm moved to purchase one. Thank you for the terrific reply.

@@imagesfromLA Definitely let us know what you think! While I agree it's not for everyone, I definitely found the experience amazing and it's why I still have it. And if it's any consolation, I resisted moving to mirrorless with a passion. For the price, it's a really good deal regardless.

Thanks again, Matthew. I agree, the price of the XT3 seems pretty reasonable. What got me interested in this camera is seeing the amazing colors of the images that come right out of the camera. I can't put my finger on it, but I've never been crazy about my 5D Mk 3. Although I did love the two Canons I had before. I'll let you know how it goes.

No the ergonics dials, controls and buttons far exceed what Sony, Canon or Nikon ever had, they suck at controls. Fuji is the first cameras in a long time that are fun to use because of the awsome dials and manual controls, , something Canon, Nikon and Sony suck at.

@@airgliderz I would agree with you about Sony (and their menus are worse than Olympus). I've never used a Canon (other than a few shots with my wife's t4i) but the Nikon d500 has fantastic ergonomics for my hands-just like the d300 that came before it.

Stephen Scharf do you notice any discernible difference between xT2 and xT3 autofocus for stills? Considering jumping for either the xT2 or xt3, and like the price of the xT2 particularly since the differences for stills seem t be negligible

@@davedowe6821 It depends on the use-case. For "general photography', and by that, I mean anything but sports or action photography, I don't see any _practically significant_ difference in the AF systems when using the camera in AF-S mode for one frame at a time autofocus. In AF-S mode, the X-T3 acquires and locks AF very slightly faster than the X-T2, but this difference would require a measurement system of high precision to determine as I would guess its on an order of less than 0.1 sec in normal lighting situations. The X-T3 will lock focus at -3 EV while the X-T2, with latest firmware, IIRC, will lock AF in AF-S at -1.5 EV I've never found this difference to be practically significant in the real world. In Continuous, high-speed AF-C mode, when shooting professioinal racing cars at speeds of over 100mph, the X-T3's Zone AF mode will acquire the subject (the car or motorcycle) somewhat more quickly and track a subject somewhat more responsively than the X-T2's AF system; I can't quantify this as I don't have a measurement system with sufficient precision to be able to determine the difference. That being said, I've shot professional motorsports for three years with an X-T2 in Boost mode at 11 FPS with the grip and have obtained outstanding results. I haven't compared the hit rate between the two (the proportion of in-focus/out of focus) for motor racing between the X-T2 and X-T3, but I have compared the hit rate between the X-H1 and X-T3, and performed statistically valid 2-proportion tests with Z-scores and p-vales on *large* data sets, and there is no statistically significant difference in the proportions of hit rate between the X-H1 and X-T3 when shooting motor racing in AF-C mode, Custom Mode 3. That's not to say the X-T3 is bad, its to show how good the X-H1 really is.

Stephen Scharf thanks Stephen! Excellent overview and analysis. Appreciate the feedback. I shoot mainly indoor lifestyle photography of families and fast moving kids so the focus acquisition of -3 EV sure sounds appealing with the XT3. Plus the face and eye detection would be great. Appreciate the response!

@@davedowe6821 You're welcome, Dave. FYI, Fujifilm NA loaned me an X-T3 and the fantastic new XF200mm f/2.0 for testing for motorsports applications to compare the AF systems between the X-H1 and X-T3, so that's where the data analysis came from. I'm a Design for Six Sigma Master Black Belt and that kind of analysis is...what we do. I would have like to have done a Design of Experiments (DOE) statistical analysis comparing 3 different factors (AF mode, Tracking Sensitivity and Speed Tracking Sensitivity) at 2 levels with quadratics in the model to detemine curvature of the functional response, but to do that with two camera bodies would have required me to create "block" in the DOE matrix and it would have gotten complicated, so I resorted to 2-proportions tests. Here's the bottom line: they're both fantastic cameras and you can't go wrong with either. Which one you get depends on your specific requirements.

@@stephenscharf6293 - Gently used X-T2's are a screaming bargain right now. About 1/2 the price of an X-T3. If you don't need the video improvement and you're not a sports shooter, I don't think the X-T3 is twice the camera.

Wait for 2020 mate 😬

Use capture one. It's basically made for Fuji cameras

I agree I think the IQ from Capture 1 is superb but I hated the constant clicking between menus to get to different tools. It slowed me down and wasn’t very intuitive

Capture One is superb. However if you want to stay with Lr then spend $25 and get the Iridient X-Transformer. This product will convert the .RAF files to .DNG files perfectly. Then you can deploy Lr without fear of degrading the image!!

@@vartkespeltekoglu7159 I tried X-Transformer. I wasn't impressed with the conversion. I found it didn't resolve the worming and oil painting effects much better than Lr. It could have been the kit fujinon 18-55 f/4-2.8-4 lens I used to test it but I've heard it is such a fantastic kit lens. It shouldn't be showing those strange artifacts. I should give it a try with some of my lenses I know are tack sharp. I do want to see how Exposure X4 handles RAF files once they get support for my X-T3. If you've never tried it, it's exactly like using Lr only without the terrible fuji RAW file handling lol

@@dirtywater5336 I shoot with the 18-55 all the time. It is not causing the issues you get in Lr. The issue is Adobe being inattentive. As for X-Transformer my experience is very different from you; it works very well. I shoot landscape and trees are a favourite subject to me. Have you varied and tried out the various variables in X-Transformer? I am wondering whether the sharpening values you may have set cause the results you are getting. As i said I have consistent success with X-Transformer and have seen others use Capture One to perfection.

I Is is good for shaking dust off your sensor, other then that just hold your camera still, no need for ibis.

Not correct, it is 10,938756488063211673074275530296421....

You can obtain excellent TTL flash performance in ambient light with the Godox series of flashes for Fujifilm. Its really very good, and when I've shot with in strong ambient light for fill for backlit subjects, its very natural-looking.

@@stephenscharf6293 Hi Stephen, I have the Godox and the problem with Fuji is the metering doesn't take flash into consideration. It may choose a very high iso, slow shutter speed and a weak flash output. I've tried with an old Canon 5D2 and it did way better with flash.

It also works better on gimbals and is more effective when shooting low and high angles. It's also less fiddly compared to Fujis current articulating design. It's overall a significantly better way to work. Also if you're filming yourself (not vlogging) it's extremely useful. Vloggers aren't the only kinds of people that benefit from a full flip out touch screen.

No it's just you who doesn't want a flip screen.

I disagree. I am a still shooter and I sometimes run into an awkward angle with my X-T3 , such as down on the ground for macro photography, that my X-T3's articulating screen can't really handle. Whereas my old Canon 60D, which had a fully articulating flip screen, would have made it a lot easier to get the shot. A flip screen isn't just for vloggers and if it doesn't inhibit the design any, what's the drawback?

don't generalise, you won't be saying that when you come to a situation where you have to shoot at lower angles.

Dirty Water I totally agree. That’s why I still have my trusty Canon 70D. Flippy all the way.