Howdy folks, newbie here :)
I have recently been bitten by the photography bug, and so went shopping (as one does).
What I think I’m looking for is a primarily landscape/slow-moving wildlife camera, that will do double duty as my travel/events camera. I set out with an uninformed budget of approximately 1500 CAD (~1050 USD). I have no real intent of going pro, but want a good camera I can grow into. I had it down to 5 options, in decreasing order of price:
- Fuji XT-5
- Fuji XT-50
- Fuji XT-30 ii
- Nikon Z fc
- Olympus OM Mark IV (V?)
(Yes, Fuji’s aesthetic speaks to me lol). After discussing with the local camera shop, they recommended the top two, which were the ones that most had my attention but due to price were only mid-range in my purchase list. They had kind off “poo-poo”-ed the other three as going backwards (xt-30), or great cameras but would hit their limits in personal growth or technical ability (Nikon and Olympus).
After handling the two X-Ts, I found the XT-50 too small, even with a handle attachment, as I have fairly large hands. Which kind of leaves me at the XT-5. So, some questions:
a) Is this way too much to spend on a first serious camera? There seem to be mixed comments about this. This is a pricey camera (2800 CAD incl. 16-50mm kit lens, USD 1965 - double my initial budget). It is by all accounts pretty good, with some autofocus issues, e.g. for bird shots - that Fuji claims to be working on addressing. I’m willing to pull the trigger (click the shutter?) if it’s worth it, I think - I don’t mind spending more once on something that will last me a LONG time. Not really a factor, but this aesthetic has added value of being a show piece - you can have it on the shelf and appreciate that it’s pretty.
b) Is ergonomics worth the extra ~300 bucks over the X-T50? On the surface it seems not, but a few have said it can be the difference between enjoying the hobby and letting it sit on the shelf.
c) Re: the autofocus - have any of you with similar cameras had any issues with this?
d) Are there durability issues with cameras, beyond the obvious? Internal components that can break, and etc?
e) Am I nuts? 😁
I’d be happy to look into some more Canon’s, Nikons, and Sony, this is just the grouping that is holding my attention. I know you can get some fabulous cameras for this type of money.
Thanks in advance!
This is a great thought! From my understanding, the 16-50 is supposed to be a remarkably good kit lens, so in discussion with the local shop, I’d initially planned to run that and maybe pick up a pancake/prime lens (not sure if I’m using that right) too.
But it sounds like maybe the 50 is a little short for wildlife shooting? This might be a lack of familiarity on my part of the “effective range” that lenses have.
I’ll make a point of digging in a bit more detail on telephoto lenses - thanks!