Stuck in a mental loop...Fujifilm X-T5 vs Canon R7
Canon does not make high quality APSC glass, if you go the r7 route you will eventually have to invest in bulky Full frame glass if you want to upgrade.
Fujifilm does make high quality apsc lenses and you can buy good sigma lenses for it too, however you end up paying almost as much for fujifilm lenses as similar canon lenses. Though the Fujifilm version will be much lighter. That rf 100-400 weights 3 times the xf 70-300.
Ultimately Fujifilms advantage is compactness and aesthetics. While Canon has an upgrade path into full frame and a bigger industry footprint.
More on reddit.comStuck in a mental loop...Fujifilm X-T5 vs Canon R7
Canon R7, Fuji X-T5 or something else: Nature and Wildlife ...
Anyone tempted to switch to the new canon R7? Still will get released for cheaper than the xt4
Nah. Next step after the X series is the GFX series.
More on reddit.comVideos
TL;DR: In a region with limited options, trying to chose between:
Canon R7, with RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3, AND RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM Lens
total price in USD equivalent: $2788
OR
Fujifilm X-T5, with XF 18-55 F2.8-4, AND Fujifilm XF 70-300mm, AND XF70-300mm f4-5.6
total price in USD equivalent: $3184
Primarily for taking photos of wildlife when travelling. Love street photography, but rarely get to do it. Price difference isn't a deal breaker in itself, just can't work out what's "better"
-- Longer version:
I'm heading off on a safari in the next couple of weeks, and my old 4/3 Lumix has just packed up. To be honest it needed an upgrade anyway as stabilisation and low-light performance were not great. The obvious replacement/upgrade would have been the OM-1 as could reuse my lenses, but no one sells Olympus or Lumix in this region. Fast forward some obsessive research... sold myself on the Fujifilm X-T5, largely because the colours look amazing, and on paper it looks a lot smaller (so I'd actually carry it about more and use it). But handled one in a store and it wasn't that much lighter and smaller than the R7 on the other side of the room. As they are all on alarm cables can't handle side-by-side so hard to tell really, but the great reviews of Canon AF etc for Wildlife and the price difference has got me second guessing myself. I suspect they are both a huge step up from my old 5-6yr old Lumix 4/3. All help greatly appreciated.
TL;DR: In a region with limited options, trying to chose between:
Canon R7, with RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3, AND RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM Lens
total price in USD equivalent: $2788
OR
Fujifilm X-T5, with XF 18-55 F2.8-4, AND Fujifilm XF 70-300mm, AND XF70-300mm f4-5.6
total price in USD equivalent: $3184
Primarily for taking photos of wildlife when travelling. Love street photography, but rarely get to do it. Price difference isn't a deal breaker in itself, just can't work out what's "better"
-- Longer version:
I'm heading off on a safari in the next couple of weeks, and my old 4/3 Lumix has just packed up. To be honest it needed an upgrade anyway as stabilisation and low-light performance were not great. The obvious replacement/upgrade would have been the OM-1 as could reuse my lenses, but no one sells Olympus or Lumix in this region. Fast forward some obsessive research... sold myself on the Fujifilm X-T5, largely because the colours look amazing, and on paper it looks a lot smaller (so I'd actually carry it about more and use it). But handled one in a store and it wasn't that much lighter and smaller than the R7 on the other side of the room. As they are all on alarm cables can't handle side-by-side so hard to tell really, but the great reviews of Canon AF etc for Wildlife and the price difference has got me second guessing myself. I suspect they are both a huge step up from my old 5-6yr old Lumix 4/3. All help greatly appreciated.
Canon does not make high quality APSC glass, if you go the r7 route you will eventually have to invest in bulky Full frame glass if you want to upgrade.
Fujifilm does make high quality apsc lenses and you can buy good sigma lenses for it too, however you end up paying almost as much for fujifilm lenses as similar canon lenses. Though the Fujifilm version will be much lighter. That rf 100-400 weights 3 times the xf 70-300.
Ultimately Fujifilms advantage is compactness and aesthetics. While Canon has an upgrade path into full frame and a bigger industry footprint.
I think I might go with the Canon since I think the AF will perform somewhat better for continuous animal eye AF.
I've found the 100-400 to be a surprisingly capable lens, although at tad soft at 400mm. That's on an R6; might be more so on a R7. But at that budget, and even compared to Fuji, not sure you'd get much better, although some used EF L glass might be worth looking at.
But the Fuji is a great set up too. Just not the reach.
And you can tweak colors as needed; you don't have to be stuck with out of the camera JPEGs.
TL;DR: In a region with limited options, trying to chose between:
Canon R7, with RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3, AND RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM Lens
total price in USD equivalent: $2788
OR
Fujifilm X-T5, with XF 18-55 F2.8-4, AND Fujifilm XF 70-300mm, AND XF70-300mm f4-5.6
total price in USD equivalent: $3184
Primarily for taking photos of wildlife when travelling. Love street photography, but rarely get to do it. Price difference isn't a deal breaker in itself, just can't work out what's "better"
-- Longer version:
I'm heading off on a safari in the next couple of weeks, and my old 4/3 Lumix has just packed up. To be honest it needed an upgrade anyway as stabilisation and low-light performance were not great. The obvious replacement/upgrade would have been the OM-1 as could reuse my lenses, but no one sells Olympus or Lumix in this region. Fast forward some obsessive research... sold myself on the Fujifilm X-T5, largely because the colours look amazing, and on paper it looks a lot smaller (so I'd actually carry it about more and use it). But handled one in a store and it wasn't that much lighter and smaller than the R7 on the other side of the room. As they are all on alarm cables can't handle side-by-side so hard to tell really, but the great reviews of Canon AF etc for Wildlife and the price difference has got me second guessing myself. I suspect they are both a huge step up from my old 5-6yr old Lumix 4/3. All help greatly appreciated.